Response and order effects in referendum voting: Exploring the influence of contextual bias on public policy
References (37)
- et al.
Ballot Position and Voter's Choice
(1957) Why an Order Effect
Public Opinion Q.
(1954)- et al.
What Must My Interest in Politics Be If I Just Told You “I Don't Know”?
Public Opinion Q.
(1984) - et al.
Opinions on Fictitious Issues: The Pressure to Answer Survey Questions
Public Opinion Q.
(1986) - et al.
The Effect of Question Order on Responses
J. Marketing Res.
(Nov. 1964) - et al.
Biases in Local Government Elections Due to Position on the Ballot Paper
Appl. Statistics
(1974) Gauging Public Opinion
(1944)Comprehension of Negation with Qualification
J. Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior
(1971)- et al.
The Current Status of American Public Opinion
- et al.
Corrective Advertising and Affirmative Disclosure Statements: Their Potential for Confusing and Misleading the Consumer
J. Marketing
(1982)
Ballot Paper Cues and the Vote in Australia and Britain: Alphabetic Voting, Sex and Title
Public Opinion Q.
An Evaluation of a Cognitive Theory of Response-Order Effects in Survey Measurement
Public Opinion Q.
Attitude Intensity, Importance, and Certainly and Susceptibility to Response Effects
J. Pers. Soc. Psychol.
Questionnaire Construction and Interview Procedure
Order Bias, The Ideal Rating and the Semantic Differential
How to Win (or Lose) a Bond Referendum
Governing
Direct Legislation: Voting on Ballot Propositions in the United States
Legislatures and the Initiative: The Politics of Direct Democracy
J. Council of State Governments
Cited by (4)
Guiding the consumer evaluation process and the probability of order-effects-in-choice
2020, Journal of Business ResearchCitation Excerpt :These order-effects-in-choice have been found for many different types of consumer experiences, including beer (Coney, 1977), soda (Dean, 1980), flavored water (Biswas, Grewal, & Roggeveen, 2010), bubble gum (Carney & Banaji, 2012), and wine (Mantonakis et al., 2009) as determined by taste tests. Order-effects-in-choice also occur for song preferences (Biswas et al., 2010; Pandelaere, Millet, & Van den Bergh, 2010), jury evaluations (Bruine de Bruin, 2005; 2006; Bruine de Bruin & Keren, 2003), donation decisions (Huber, Van Boven, McGraw, & Johnson-Graham, 2011), and voting for political candidates (Abakoumkin, 2011; Handlin, 1994; Miller & Krosnick, 1998; Kim, Krosnick, & Casanto, 2015). Beyond a consumer context, serial position can even have an influence on decisions of manufacturing firms (Muthulingam, Corbett, Benartzi, & Oppenheim, 2013), paper citing by academics (Feenberg, Ganguli, Gaulé, & Gruber, 2017; Huang, 2015), the diagnoses of clinical psychologists (Cwik & Margraf, 2017), and even the decisions of rhesus macaque monkeys (Xu, Knight, & Kralik, 2011).
Consumer Reactions to a Provider's Position on Social Issues: The Effect of Varying Frames of Reference
1996, Journal of Consumer PsychologyToward a better use of the semantic differential in IS research: An integrative framework of suggested action
2015, Journal of the Association for Information SystemsUnderstanding and improving the validity of self-report of parenting
2006, Clinical Child and Family Psychology Review