MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1866101882 · doi:10.18148/srm/2015.v9i2.6128

Straightlining in Web survey panels over time

2015· article· en· W1866101882 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueDOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicSurvey Methodology and Nonresponse
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSatisficingPanel surveyWeb surveyImmigrationCore (optical fiber)Set (abstract data type)Panel dataGridThe InternetPsychologyDemographic economicsSociologySocial psychologyComputer scienceTelecommunicationsEconometricsGeographyDemographyMathematicsWorld Wide WebEconomicsArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Straightlining, an indicator of satisficing, refers to giving the same answer in a series of questions arranged on a grid. We investigated whether straightlining changes with respondents’ panel experience in two open-access Internet panels in the Netherlands: the LISS and Dutch Immigrant panels. Specifically, we considered straightlining on 10 grid questions in LISS core modules (7 waves) and on a grid of evaluation questions in both the LISS panel (150+ waves) and the Dutch immigrant panel (50+ waves). For both core modules and evaluation questions we found that straightlining increases with respondents’ panel experience for at least three years. Straightlining is also associated with younger age and non-western 1st generation immigrants. Where straightlining was a plausible set of answers, prevalence of straightlining was much larger (15-40%) than where straightlining was implausible (

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.099
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.029
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesMetaresearch
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.070
Threshold uncertainty score0.994

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0990.029
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0030.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0180.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.789
GPT teacher head0.683
Teacher spread0.106 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it