Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

The Effect of Question Order on Disclosure of Intimate Partner Violence: An Experimental Test Using the Conflict Tactics Scales

  • Published:
Journal of Family Violence Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Two plausible but contradictory approaches to question order in research on sensitive or criminal behavior are (1) that presenting the questions in a sequence corresponding to a culturally recognized behavior pattern will facilitate disclosure, and (2) that presenting questions in random order will result in more disclosure because random order disrupts response sets. The question order of the original Conflict Tactics Scales (CTS1) used the culturally recognized sequence approach, and the revised CTS (CTS2) used a modified random order. This experiment was designed to determine which of these two question orders results in more disclosure of physical and sexual assault of a dating partner. The standard version of the CTS2, which has the questions from each of the 5 scales interspersed in a slightly modified random order, was administered to every second student in a sample of 417 university students. The other half of the sample were given the same instrument but with the questions in the culturally recognized sequential order used in the CTS1. The cultural sequence order begins with the socially approved behaviors in the Negotiation scale and ends with scales measuring antisocial and the criminal behavior such as the Physical Assault scale. The results indicate that the CTS2 random order produced significantly higher disclosure rates for the scales that measure criminal behavior (Physical Assault, Injury, and Sexual Coercion) and made no difference for the other CTS2 scales (Negotiation and Psychological Aggression). Although these results suggest that the CTS2 random order is the preferred approach, reasons to treat that conclusion with caution are presented.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

REFERENCES

  • Campbell, D. T., and Fiske, D. W. (1959). Convergent and discriminant validation by the multitrait–multimethod matrix. Psychol. Bull. 56: 81–105.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Cronbach, L. J. (1970). Essentials of Psychological Testing (3rd edn.). Harper and Row, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dahlstrom, W. G., Brooks, J. D., and Peterson, C. D. (1990). The Beck Depression Inventory: Item order and the impact of response sets. J. Pers. Assess. 55: 224–233.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Maxfield, M. G., and Babbie, E. (1995). Research Methods for Criminal Justice and Criminology, Wadsworth, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • Moore, D. W., and Straus, M. A. (1995). Tolerance for Slapping a Spouse: Higher than we thought. Paper presented at the Annual meeting of the American Association for Public Opinion Research, Fort Lauderdale, FL. Available at http://PUBPAGES.UNH.EDU/~MAS2

  • Orne, M. (1962). Amount of experience in experiments as a determinant of performance in later experiments. J. Per. Soc. Psychol. 17: 776–783.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ramirez, I. L. (2001). The Relation of Acculturation, Criminal History, and Social Integration of the Mexican Americans and the Non-Mexican Whites to Assaults on Intimate Partners, Unpublished Dissertation, University of New Hampshire, Durham, NH.

    Google Scholar 

  • Reynolds, W. M. (1982). Development of reliable and valid short forms of the Marlowe–Crowne Social Desirability Scale. J. Clin. Psychol. 38(1): 119–125.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rossi, P. H., Wright, J. D., and Anderson, A. B. (eds.). (1983). Handbook of Survey Research, Academic Press, Orlando.

    Google Scholar 

  • Simon, T. R., Anderson, M., Thompson, M. P., Crosby, A. E., Shelley, G., and Sacks, J. J. (2001). Attitudinal acceptance of intimate partner violence among U.S. adults. Violence Victims 16(2): 115–126.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Straus, M. A. (1979). Measuring intrafamily conflict and violence: The conflict tactics (CT) scales. J. Marriage Fam. 41: 75–88.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Straus, M. A., Hamby, S. L., Boney-McCoy, S., and Sugarman, D. (1999). The Personal and Relationships Profile (PRP), Family Research Laboratory, University of New Hampshire, Durham, NH.

    Google Scholar 

  • Straus, M. A., Hamby, S. L., Boney-McCoy, S., and Sugarman, D. B. (1996). The revised Conflict Tactics Scales (CTS2): Development and preliminary psychometric data. J. Fam. Issues 17(3): 283–316.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Straus, M. A., and Mouradian, V. E. (November 19, 1999). Preliminary Psychometric Data for the Personal and Relationships Profile (PRP): A multi-scale tool for clinical screening and research on partner violence. Paper presented at the American Society of Criminology, Toronto, Ontario.

  • Sugarman, D. B., and Hotaling, G. T. (1996). Intimate violence and social desirability: A meta-analytic review. J. Interpers. Violence 12(2): 275–290.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yodanis, C., Hill, K., and Straus, M. A. (1997). Tabular Summary of Methodological Characteristics of Research Using the Conflict Tactics Scales, Family Research Laboratory, University of New Hampshire, Durham, NH. Available at http://PUBPAGES.UNH.EDU/~MAS2

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Ignacio Luis Ramirez.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Ramirez, I.L., Straus, M.A. The Effect of Question Order on Disclosure of Intimate Partner Violence: An Experimental Test Using the Conflict Tactics Scales. J Fam Viol 21, 1–9 (2006). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10896-005-9000-4

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10896-005-9000-4

KEY WORDS:

Navigation