This Article Full Text (PDF) References Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Citation Map Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Alert me to new issues of the journal Add to Saved Citations Download to citation manager Request Permissions Request Reprints Add to My Marked Citations Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Citing Articles via Scopus Google Scholar Articles by Koch, J. L. Articles by Rhodes, S. R. Search for Related Content Social Bookmarking                         What's this?

Problems with Reactive Instruments in Field Research

Department of Management, College of Business Administration, University of Oregon

Susan R. Rhodes

School of Management, Syracuse University

This study sought to examine problems in assessing field experiments with conventional survey-based data gathering methods. Two phenomena are examined: (a) increases in reactiveness, and (b) the recalibration of survey scales. The theoretical dimensions of such changes are discussed, including such processes as consistency, saliency, priming, and raised expectations. Methods of identifying these sources of contamination within two-group experimental designs are presented and illustrated with data from a recent field experiment involving 78 female sewing machine operators. In this instance, survey-data gathering processes increased "reactiveness," suggesting a general increase in the salience of experimental variables to subjects; and, scale recalibration appears to have occurred with respect to a primanV intervention variable. Methods of reducing or accommodating these possible sources of contamination are discussed, together with their implications for the protection of human subjects.

The Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, Vol. 15, No. 4, 485-506 (1979)
DOI: 10.1177/002188637901500404


CiteULike    Complore    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter    What's this?

This article has been cited by other articles:

				D. C. Vitale, A. A. Armenakis, and H. S. Feild Integrating Qualitative and Quantitative Methods for Organizational Diagnosis: Possible Priming Effects? Journal of Mixed Methods Research, January 1, 2008; 2(1): 87 - 105. [Abstract] [PDF]

				C. N. Tennis Responses to the Alpha, Beta, Gamma Change Typology: Cultural Resistance To Change Group Organization Management, June 1, 1989; 14(2): 134 - 149. [Abstract]

				R. L. Anderson and J. R. Terborg Employee Beliefs and Support for a Work Redesign Intervention Journal of Management, September 1, 1988; 14(3): 493 - 503. [Abstract] [PDF]

				M. Blumberg and C. D. Pringle How Control Groups Can Cause Loss of Control in Action Research: The Case of Rushton Coal Mine Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, December 1, 1983; 19(4): 409 - 425. [Abstract] [PDF]