Author's Keywords: political knowledge, voting, elections, public opinion, survey, experiment, incentives	Convention Need a solution for abstract management? All Academic can help! Contact us today to find out how our system can help your annual meeting. Submission - Custom fields, multiple submission types, tracks, audio visual, multiple upload formats, automatic conversion to pdf. Review - Peer Review, Bulk reviewer assignment, bulk emails, ranking, z-score statistics, and multiple worksheets! Reports - Many standard and custom reports generated while you wait. Print programs with participant indexes, event grids, and more! Scheduling - Flexible and convenient grid scheduling within rooms and buildings. Conflict checking and advanced filtering. Communication - Bulk email tools to help your administrators send reminders and responses. Use form letters, a message center, and much more! Management - Search tools, duplicate people management, editing tools, submission transfers, many tools to manage a variety of conference management headaches! Click here for more information.
Association: Name: American Political Science Association URL: http://www.apsanet.org
Citation: URL: http://www.allacademic.com/meta/p41559_index.html Direct Link: HTML Code:

Prior, Markus. and Lupia, Arthur. "What Citizens Know Depends on How You Ask Them: Experiments on Political Knowledge Under Respondent-Friendly Conditions" Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Political Science Association, Marriott Wardman Park, Omni Shoreham, Washington Hilton, Washington, DC, Sep 01, 2005 <Not Available>. 2011-03-14 <http://www.allacademic.com/meta/p41559_index.html>

Prior, M. and Lupia, A. , 2005-09-01 "What Citizens Know Depends on How You Ask Them: Experiments on Political Knowledge Under Respondent-Friendly Conditions" Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Political Science Association, Marriott Wardman Park, Omni Shoreham, Washington Hilton, Washington, DC Online <APPLICATION/PDF>. 2011-03-14 from http://www.allacademic.com/meta/p41559_index.html

Publication Type: Conference Paper/Unpublished Manuscript Review Method: Peer Reviewed Abstract: Many people are concerned about what citizens know about politics. Surveys provide widely cited measures of such knowledge. Do unusual aspects of survey interviews affect these measures? An experiment on a nationally representative sample of over 1200 Americans reveals an answer. Respondents are randomly assigned to one of four groups. The control group answers questions in a typical survey context. Other respondents are given extra time to answer knowledge questions, a small monetary incentive for answering these questions correctly, or both. These variations produce significant performance increases for almost every knowledge question we asked. Overall, average knowledge scores in the treatment groups are 10-20% higher than in the control group. The treatments also cause significant reductions in the magnitude of error entailed in incorrect responses. Our results imply that more reliable measures of political knowledge require improved elicitation strategies.

Effects of Survey Question Order on Reports of Political Interest

Fast Time and Simple Questions: The Effects of Age, Experience and Question Complexity on Web Survey Response Time

The Effect of Interviewer Context on White Respondents' Answers to Questions of Racial Policy and Stereotypes