The nature of the forbid/allow asymmetry - Two correlational studies
The nature of the forbid/allow asymmetry - Two correlational studies
复制标题
DOI：
10.1177/0049124199028002004
复制
发表时间：
1999-11-01
影响因子：
6.3
通讯作者：
Holleman, B
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Holleman, B
由于动词forbid和allow被认为是彼此的对应物，人们会期望用forbid或allow来表达的问题的答案是彼此的对立物。研究表明，情况并非如此。在调查中使用这些动词会产生一种被称为禁止/允许不对称的措辞效果。调查结果没有显示，但是，在不对称起源：在态度本地化的阶段，或在映射到一个响应选项的态度。本文采用相关设计。进行了两个实验，重点禁止和允许的同源性，对环境问题的态度和复制有关种族群体的态度。两个实验的结果表明，禁止和允许的问题是同源的，也就是说，他们测量相同的态度。对禁止/允许问题的回答反映了相似的态度，但由于使用了两个动词，在回答量表上表达的态度不同。此外，本文还对该效应的解释进行了讨论和探讨，重点关注了无差异被试的回答行为。
As the verbs forbid and allow are considered each other's counterparts, one would expect the answers to questions worded with forbid or allow to be each other's opposites. Research shows that this is not the case. Use of these verbs in surveys causes a wording effect known as the forbid/allow asymmetry. Findings do not reveal, however where the asymmetry originates: during the stage of attitude localization or during the mapping of the attitude onto one of the response options. In this article, a correlational design was used. Two experiments were carried out focusing on the congenericity of forbid and allow, one on attitudes toward environmental issues and a replication on attitudes concerning ethnic groups. Results of both experiments show that forbid and allow questions are congeneric; that is, they measure the same attitude. Answers to forbid/allow questions reflect similar attitudes that are expressed differently on the answering scales due to the use of both verbs. In addition the explanation of the effect focusing on the answering behavior of indifferent respondents is discussed and explored.