Pengaruh Preferensi Bentuk Kuesioner dan Familiaritas Internet terhadap Konsistens Respon pada Mahasiswa Unika Atma Jaya

Authors

  • Ferdinand Prawiro Faculty of Psychology, Atma Jaya Catholic University of Indonesia
  • Hardianto

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.25170/manasa.v12i2.4875

Keywords:

preferensi bentuk kuesioner, konsistensi respon, kuesioner online, kuesioner offline

Abstract

Kuesioner online memiliki potensi besar untuk digunakan dalam berbagai penelitian terutama pada masyarakat yang sudah akrab dengan internet. Namun terdapat perbedaan pandangan mengenai akurasi data yang dihasilkan melalui kuesioner online dibandingkan kuesioner offline. Berdasarkan theory of survey satisficing, akurasi data kuesioner tergantung seberapa besar motivasi partisipan dalam mengerjakan pertanyaan dalam kuesioner. Penelitian ini bertujuan untuk mengetahui pengaruh preferensi bentuk kuesioner dan familiaritas internet terhadap konsistensi respon pada mahasiswa Unika Atma Jaya.

Penelitian menggunakan 2 X 2 randomized factorial design dengan sampel sebesar 160 mahasiswa aktif Unika Atma Jaya yang diperoleh melalui quota sampling. Data dianalisis dengan 2-way analysis of variance.

Hasil penelitian menunjukkan bahwa jika tanpa memperhatikan bentuk kuesioner online atau offline, maka tidak terdapat pengaruh preferensi bentuk kuesioner dan familiaritas internet terhadap konsistensi respon. Namun hasil yang menarik jika memperhatikan bentuk kuesioner yang dihadapi partisipan. Pada pengerjaan kuesioner online, kesesuaian preferensi partisipan mempengaruhi konsistensi respon; sedangkan pada pengerjaan kuesioner offline, kesesuaian preferensi partispan tidak mempengaruhi konsistensi respon. Hal ini mengindikasikan proses satisficing terjadi pada partisipan yang ‘terpaksa’ mengerjakan kuesioner online saja, tidak pada pengerjaan kuesioner offline.

References

Ahern, N. (2005). Using the internet to conduct research. Nurse Researcher, 13(2), 55-70. doi: 10.7748/nr2005.10.13.2.55.c5968

Andrews, D., Nonnecke, B., & Preece, J. (2003). Electronic survey methodology: A case study in reaching hard-to-involve internet users. International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction, 16(2), 185-210. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15327590IJHC1602_04

Atherton, H., Oakeshott, P., Aghaizu, A., Hay, P., & Kerry, S. (2010). Use of an online questionnaire for follow-up of young female students recruited to a randomised controlled trial of chlamydia screening. Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health, 64(7), 580–584. https://doi.org/10.1136/jech.2009.098830

Bowling, A. (2005). Mode of questionnaire administration can have serious effects on data quality. Journal of Public Health (Oxford, England), 27(3), 281–291. https://doi.org/10.1093/pubmed/fdi031

Cai, L. & Zhu, Y. (2015). The challenges of data quality and data quality assessment in the big data era. Data Science Journal, 14, 2. doi: 10.5334/dsj-2015-002.

Deutskens, E., de Jong, A., de Ruyter, K., & Wetzels, M. (2006). Comparing the generalizability of online and mail surveys in cross-national service quality research. Marketing Letters, 17, 119–136. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11002-006-4950-8

Dillman, D. A. (2000). Mail and internet surveys: The tailored design method. USA: Wiley.

Fischer, J. & Corcoran, K. J. (1994). Measures for clinical practice: A sourcebook, Vol.2. USA: Free Press.

Hunter L. (2012). Challenging the reported disadvantages of e-questionnaires and addressing methodological issues of online data collection. Nurse Researcher, 20(1), 11–20. https://doi.org/10.7748/nr2012.09.20.1.11.c9303

KOMINFO & Katadata Insight Center. (2022). Status Literasi Digital di Indonesia 2022.

Krosnick, J. A. (1991). Response strategies for coping with the cognitive demands of attitude measures in surveys. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 5, 213-236. https://doi.org/10.1002/acp.2350050305

Krosnick, J. A. (1999). Survey research. Annual Review of Psychology, 50, 537-567. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.psych.50.1.537

Lelkes, Y., Krosnick, J.A., Marx, D.M., Judd, C.M., & Park, B. (2012). Complete anonymity compromises the accuracy of self-reports. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 48, 1291-1299. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2012.07.002

Riva, G., Teruzzi, T., & Anolli, L. (2003). The use of the Internet in psychology research: Comparison of online and offline questionnaires. CyberPsychology & Behavior, 6(1), 73–80. https://doi.org/10.1089/109493103321167983

Solomon, L. J., & Rothblum, E. D. (1984). Academic procrastination: Frequency and cognitive-behavioral correlates. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 31, 503-509. doi:10.1037/0022-0167.31.4.503

Ward, P., Clark, T., Zabriskie, R. & Morris, T. (2014). Paper/pencil versus online data collection: An exploratory study. Journal of Leisure Research, 46(1), 84-105. https://doi.org/10.1080/00222216.2014.11950314

Downloads

Published

2024-01-25
Abstract views: 26 | PDF downloads: 30