“ChatBot” is a Two Syllable Word...Or Is It?: Using Generative AI for Survey Question Readability Assessments

Market and survey researchers aim to write survey questions so that the target population can understand them. A common recommendation for general population studies is to write survey questions at an eighth-grade reading level. To evaluate whether questions meet this threshold, survey researchers turn to readability measures, such as the Flesch-Kincaid Reading Grade Level. Researchers may be able to streamline the calculation of question reading levels using artificial intelligence (AI) tools, such as ChatGPT, in situ to draft survey questions. One risk of using artificial intelligence tools is that they may incorrectly calculate readability measures. To our knowledge, whether AI tools calculate readability correctly has not been evaluated. In this paper, we examine readability calculations for 60 survey questions performed by commonly available AI tools, including both ChatGPT and Claude large language models (LLMs), at three time points (Summer 2024, November 2024, April 2025). We compare these to a “gold standard” online readability assessment tool (Readable.com), and calculations from packages in two open-source software programs, R and Python. We examine the Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level and four other readability measures and the inputs to their calculations (e.g., number of words, sentences). Although there is almost perfect alignment between these metrics as calculated by Readable and R, each LLM varies in its calculations across models and over time. We also examine the calculations of the inputs of the readability calculations for each tool, including implications for the reported overall readability score. Our results suggest that open-source tools are reliable and accurate. We also find that LLMs are evolving in their ability to accurately calculate readability of survey questions, with large variation over models and over time. Some, but not all, LLMs are being trained to use the same resources as open-source tools to calculate readability of passages of text.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
International Journal of Market Research
Published
2025-10-21
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1177/14707853251389789
Primary Topic
Computational and Text Analysis Methods
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

“ChatBot” is a Two Syllable Word...Or Is It?: Using Generative AI for Survey Question Readability Assessments

Kristen Olson, Trent D. Buskirk
International Journal of Market Research
Computational and Text Analysis Methods
article

“ChatBot” is a Two Syllable Word...Or Is It?: Using Generative AI for Survey Question Readability Assessments

Kristen Olson, Trent D. Buskirk
article en

Abstract

Market and survey researchers aim to write survey questions so that the target population can understand them. A common recommendation for general population studies is to write survey questions at an eighth-grade reading level. To evaluate whether questions meet this threshold, survey researchers turn to readability measures, such as the Flesch-Kincaid Reading Grade Level. Researchers may be able to streamline the calculation of question reading levels using artificial intelligence (AI) tools, such as ChatGPT, in situ to draft survey questions. One risk of using artificial intelligence tools is that they may incorrectly calculate readability measures. To our knowledge, whether AI tools calculate readability correctly has not been evaluated. In this paper, we examine readability calculations for 60 survey questions performed by commonly available AI tools, including both ChatGPT and Claude large language models (LLMs), at three time points (Summer 2024, November 2024, April 2025). We compare these to a “gold standard” online readability assessment tool (Readable.com), and calculations from packages in two open-source software programs, R and Python. We examine the Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level and four other readability measures and the inputs to their calculations (e.g., number of words, sentences). Although there is almost perfect alignment between these metrics as calculated by Readable and R, each LLM varies in its calculations across models and over time. We also examine the calculations of the inputs of the readability calculations for each tool, including implications for the reported overall readability score. Our results suggest that open-source tools are reliable and accurate. We also find that LLMs are evolving in their ability to accurately calculate readability of survey questions, with large variation over models and over time. Some, but not all, LLMs are being trained to use the same resources as open-source tools to calculate readability of passages of text.

International Journal of Market ResearchVol. 68(1)
University of Nebraska–Lincoln (US), Dominion University College (GH), Old Dominion University (US)
Openalex Percentile: Top 58%
Computational and Text Analysis Methods
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.