Increasingly, evaluations of pretes

Increasingly, evaluations of pretesting methods have focused on the side-by-side comparison of techniques, in order to determine the degree to which the results obtained through use of these techniques agree, even if they cannot be directly validated. However, this research is complex, as evaluation in practice must take into account the multi-faceted nature of each of the pretesting techniques, and of questionnaire design in general (see Willis, DeMaio, and Harris-Kojetin, 1999). Although two studies (Presser and Blair, 1994; Willis, 2005) have specifically compared the results of cognitive interviewing, expert evaluation, and behavior coding, when these have been applied to the same questionnaire, this research has generally not been conducted in a way that allows for the separation of the effects of pretesting method from those of the organization applying these methods.

การประเมินผลของวิธีการ pretesting ได้มุ่งเน้นการเปรียบเทียบด้านโดยด้านข้างเพื่อกำหนดระดับผลที่ได้รับผ่านการใช้เทคนิคเหล่านี้เห็นด้วยแม้ว่าพวกเขาจะไม่สามารถตรวจสอบได้โดยตรง อย่างไรก็ตามการวิจัยนี้มีความซับซ้อนเช่นการประเมินผลในทางปฏิบัติจะต้องคำนึงถึงธรรมชาติหลายของแต่ละเทคนิค pretesting และการออกแบบแบบสอบถามทั่วไป (ดูวิลลิส DeMaio และแฮร์ริส Kojetin, 1999) แม้ว่าทั้งสองการศึกษา (Presser และแบลร์ปี 1994 วิลลิส, 2005) ได้มีการเปรียบเทียบเฉพาะผลของการสัมภาษณ์ความรู้ความเข้าใจการประเมินโดยผู้เชี่ยวชาญและพฤติกรรมการเข้ารหัสเมื่อเหล่านี้ได้ถูกนำไปใช้แบบสอบถามเดียวกันงานวิจัยนี้ได้โดยทั่วไปไม่ได้รับการดำเนินการในทางที่ช่วยให้การแยกของผลกระทบของวิธี pretesting จากบรรดาองค์กรใช้วิธีการเหล่านี้

ผลลัพธ์ (อังกฤษ) 1:

Increasingly, evaluations of pretesting methods have focused on the side-by-side comparison of techniques, in order to determine the degree to which the results obtained through use of these techniques agree, even if they cannot be directly validated. However, this research is complex, as evaluation in practice must take into account the multi-faceted nature of each of the pretesting techniques, and of questionnaire design in general (see Willis, DeMaio, and Harris-Kojetin, 1999). Although two studies (Presser and Blair, 1994; Willis, 2005) have specifically compared the results of cognitive interviewing, expert evaluation, and behavior coding, when these have been applied to the same questionnaire, this research has generally not been conducted in a way that allows for the separation of the effects of pretesting method from those of the organization applying these methods.Evaluation of methods for pretesting are focused to compare side by side to determine the results achieved through the use of these techniques, see even if they are not able to check directly. However, this research is complex, such as the practical assessment, to take into account the nature of each technique. Pretesting the questionnaire design, and General (see Villa Martelli sat DeMaio and Harris Kojetin, 1999), although the two studies (Presser and Blair in 1994, Wilkins, 2005) compared the effects of specific cognitive interview expert assessment, and the behavior when these are applied to the same query, this research has generally not been implemented in a way that allows the separation of the impact of how organisations from among the pretesting used these methods.

ผลลัพธ์ (อังกฤษ) 2:

Increasingly, evaluations of pretesting methods have focused on the side-by-side comparison of techniques, in order to determine the degree to which the results obtained through use of these techniques agree, even if they can not be directly validated. However, this research is. complex, as evaluation in practice must take into account the multi-faceted nature of each of the pretesting techniques, and of questionnaire design in general (see Willis, DeMaio, and Harris-Kojetin, 1999). Although two studies (Presser and Blair,. 1994; Willis, 2005) have specifically compared the results of cognitive interviewing, expert evaluation, and behavior coding, when these have been applied to the same questionnaire, this research has generally not been conducted in a way that allows for the separation of the effects. of pretesting method from those of the organization applying these methods. the evaluation of the pretesting has focused on comparing side by side to determine the results obtained through the use of these techniques is that although they can not. direct examination However, this research is more complex, such evaluations in practice will have to take into account the nature of many of the techniques pretesting and questionnaire design (look Willis DeMaio and Harris Kojetin, 1999), although both studies. (Presser and Blair 1994 Willis, 2005) have compared the results of the interviews, cognitive assessments by experts and behavioral coding when these are applied to the same query this research by. generally not been done in a way that allows the separation of the impact of how the organizations use pretesting of these methods.

ผลลัพธ์ (อังกฤษ) 3:

Increasingly evaluations of, pretesting methods have focused on the side - by-side comparison, of techniques in order to. Determine the degree to which the results obtained through use of these techniques agree even if, they cannot be directly. Validated. However this research, is complex as evaluation, in practice must take into account the multi-faceted nature. Of each of the pretesting techniques and of, questionnaire design in general (see Willis DeMaio and Harris-Kojetin 1999,,,). Although two studies (Presser, and Blair 1994; Willis 2005), have specifically compared the results of, cognitive interviewing. Expert evaluation and behavior, coding when these, have been applied to the same questionnaire this research, has generally. Not been conducted in a way that allows for the separation of the effects of pretesting method from those of the organization. Applying these methods.Evaluation of the methods of pretesting have focused on the comparison of side by side to determine a level results obtained through the use of these techniques agree even if they cannot be verified directly. However, this research is complex, such as practical evaluation must consider several nature of each technique and pretesting query design in general. (see Willis DeMaio Harris, and Kojetin 1999) even though both education (Presser and Blair years 1994 Willis, 2005) has compared the specific effects of the interview knowledge assessment by experts and the behavior of encryption when these have been used the same questionnaire, this research has generally do not love. Around the way allows separation of the impact of pretesting way from those organizations are using these methods.