Stray, Stephanie. (2009) Lies, damned lies and statistics : the accuracy of survey responses. Quality & Quantity, Vol.43 (No.1). pp. 161-171. ISSN 0033-5177

Full text not available from this repository.

Abstract

That survey research is error prone is not a new idea and different varieties of non-sampling error have been investigated in the literature as well as consideration being given in many statistics textbooks to the issue of sampling error. The paper here considers research upon corporate environmental reporting. It compares information provided by corporate environmental reports with information that survey respondents claim their organization's environmental report contains. This enables the accuracy of the claims to be assessed. Consideration is given to two different industries the Water industry and the Energy industry. Errors due to inaccurate reporting by survey respondents are shown to be relatively infrequent and respondents appear just about as likely to claim they report information that they do not, in fact, report as to fail to indicate that they report information that is, in fact, actually reported.

Item Type:	Journal Article
Subjects:	Q Science > QA Mathematics T Technology > TD Environmental technology. Sanitary engineering
Divisions:	Faculty of Social Sciences > Warwick Business School > Operational Research & Management Sciences Faculty of Social Sciences > Warwick Business School
Library of Congress Subject Headings (LCSH):	Environmental reporting, Sampling (Statistics), Surveys -- Evaluation
Journal or Publication Title:	Quality & Quantity
Publisher:	Springer
ISSN:	0033-5177
Date:	January 2009
Volume:	Vol.43
Number:	No.1
Number of Pages:	11
Page Range:	pp. 161-171
Identification Number:	10.1007/s11135-007-9131-1
Status:	Peer Reviewed
Publication Status:	Published
Access rights to Published version:	Restricted or Subscription Access
References:	Assael, H., Keon, J.: Nonsampling vs. sampling errors in survey research. J. Mark. 46(2), 114–124 (1982) Brener, N.D., Grundbaum, J.A.,Kann, L.,McManus, T., Ross, J.:Assessing health risk behaviours among adolescents: the effect of question wording and appeals for honesty. J. Adolesc. Health 35(2), 91–100 (2004) Clarke, J., Gibson-Sweet, M.: The use of corporate social disclosures in the management of reputation and legitimacy: a cross sectoral analysis of UK Top 100 Companies. Busi. Ethics Eur. Rev. 8(1), 5–13 (1999) Claycomb, C., Porter, S.S., Martin, C.L.: Riding the wave: response rates and the effects of time intervals between successive mail survey follow-up efforts. J. Busi. Res. 48, 157–162 (2000) DEFRA: Environmental Reporting: General Guidelines. DEFRA publications, London (2005) Dewey, M.E.: Coefficients of agreement. Brit. J. Psychiatry 143, 487–489 (1983) Dillman, D.: Mail and Telephone Survey: The Total Design Method. New York, NY, Wiley (1978) Dunn, K.A, Huss, H.F.: Mail survey reliability through follow-up mailings: the case of auditor changes. Manage. Audit. J. 19(8/9), 1048–1054 (2004) Edwards, P.K., Marginson, P.: Testing for local management autonomy: A question of perception? Pers. Rev. 16(2), 12–22 (1987) ENDS: DEFRA consults on green reporting guidelines. ENDS 366, 41–42 (2005) ENDS: Environmental management rises up invertors’ priority list. ENDS 374, 13 (2006) Ferrell, O.C., Krugman, D.: Response patterns and the importance of the follow-up duplicate questionnaire in a mail survey of advertising managers. Eur. Res. 11(4), 157–164 (1983) Graeff, T.R.: Uninformed response bias in telephone surveys. J. Busi. Res. 55, 251–259 (2002) Graeff, T.R.: Exploring consumers’ answers to survey questions: are uninformed responses truly uninformed. Psycho. Mark. 20, 643–667 (2003) Gray, R., Kouhy, R., Lavers, S.: Corporate Social and Environmental Reporting: A review of the literature and a longitudinal study of UK Disclosure. Account. Audit. Account. J. 8(2), 47–77 (1995) Guthrie, J., Mathews, M.R.: Corporate social accounting in Australasia. In: Preston L.E. (ed.) Research in Corporate Social Performance and Policy, vol. 7, pp. 251–277. JAI Press, Greenwich, CT (1985) Hunt, R.: Percent agreement, Pearson’s correlation, and kappa as measures of inter-examiner reliability. J. Dent. Res. 65(2), 128–180 (1986) Kerlinger, F.N.: Foundations of Behaviour Research. 2nd edn. Holt, Rinehart, Winston Inc., New York, NY (1973) Krippendorff, K.: Reliability of binary attribute data. Biometrics 34, 142–144 (1978) Krippendorff, K.: Association, agreement and equity. Qual. Quant. 21, 109–123 (1987) Lombard, M., Snyder-Duch, J., Bracken, C.: Practical Resources for Assessing and Reporting Inter-coder Reliability in Content Analysis Research Projects. http://www.temple.edu/sct/mmc/reliability (2004) Milne, M., Adler, R.: Exploring the reliability of social and environmental disclosures content analysis. Account. Audit. Account. J. 12(2), 237–256 (1999) Scheaffer, R., Mendenhall,W., Ott L.: Elementary Survey Sampling, 3rd edn. Duxbury Press, North Scituate, MA (1990) Schneider, K.C.: Uninformed response rates in survey research: new evidence. J. Busi. Res. 154–162 (1985) Stray, S., Ballantine, J.: A sectoral comparison off corporate environmental reporting and disclosure. J. Eco-Manage. Audit. 7(4), 165–177 (2000)
URI:	http://wrap.warwick.ac.uk/id/eprint/28888

Data sourced from Thomson Reuters' Web of Knowledge

Request changes to a record

Actions (login required)

View Item