This Article Full Text (PDF) All Versions of this Article: 0273475309335267v1 31/2/160    most recent References Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Citation Map Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Alert me to new issues of the journal Add to Saved Citations Download to citation manager Request Permissions Request Reprints Add to My Marked Citations Citing Articles Citing Articles via Scopus Google Scholar Articles by Dolnicar, S. Articles by Grün, B. Social Bookmarking                         What's this?

Response Style Contamination of Student Evaluation Data

University of Wollongong, New South Wales, Australia

Bettina Grün

Wirtschaftsuniversität Wien, Vienna, Austria

Student evaluation surveys provide instructors with feedback regarding development opportunities and they form the basis of promotion and tenure decisions. Student evaluations have been extensively studied, but one dimension hitherto neglected is the actual measurement aspect: which questions to ask, how to ask them, and what answer options to offer to students to get the most valid results. This study investigates whether cross-cultural response styles affect the validity of student evaluations. If they do, then the student mix in a class can affect an instructor's evaluation, potentially producing biased feedback and prompting inappropriate decisions by university committees. This article discusses two main response styles, demonstrates the nature of the bias they can cause in student evaluation surveys using simulated artificial data, and illustrates three cases based on real student evaluation data in which marketing instructors' teaching quality assessments may be heavily biased because of response styles. The authors propose a simple method to check for response style contamination in student evaluation data and they discuss some practical implications.

Key Words: student evaluations • survey • answer format • Likert-type scale • ordinal • response style • satisfaction

This version was published on August 1, 2009

Journal of Marketing Education, Vol. 31, No. 2, 160-172 (2009)
DOI: 10.1177/0273475309335267


CiteULike    Complore    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter    What's this?