<p>It is well known that the sequence in which questions are asked in a survey can affect answers as earlier questions can influence the frame of mind in which a respondent answers a subsequent question. An illustration of this can be found in the BBC comedy series <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G0ZZJXw4MTA" rel="nofollow noreferrer"><em>Yes Minister</em></a>.</p>
<p>My question is whether there has been any research into whether the wording of official surveys affects opinions <strong>in the longer term</strong>.</p>
<p>For example, if a respondent to an official survey <a href="https://politics.stackexchange.com/questions/69720/what-is-the-rationale-for-the-united-kingdom-statistics-body-not-allowing-black">such as a census</a> is presented with a ethnicity question in the form of one large box entitled <em>White</em> containing tickbox options such as <em>British</em>, <em>English</em>, and <em>Welsh</em>, next to another large box entitled <em>Non-white</em> containing other options none of which is <em>British</em>, <em>English</em>, and <em>Welsh</em> then that will obviously (all other things being equal) increase the number of &quot;white&quot; people who choose <em>English</em> <strong>in that particular survey</strong> and decrease the number of &quot;non-White&quot; people who choose <em>English</em> <strong>in that particular survey</strong> even if <em>other (please specify)</em> write in options are freely available.</p>
<p>But has there been any research into the <strong>longer-term effect</strong> of such surveys? Does the frequent asking of the question in this way actually change perceptions of what is meant by <em>English</em> so as to cause some people to shift their viewpoint and start to believe that the term <em>English</em> as an ethnicity is limited to &quot;white&quot; people?</p>

CC BY-SA 4.0
2021-12-03T22:03:14.343Z
Since this is primarily asking about survey methodology and how their structure influences respondents, I think it's indeed better suited for psychology. I'll migrate it there as I don't think there's a distinct link with politics.
JJJ
CC BY-SA 4.0
2021-12-03T22:47:50.063Z
@JJJ I think you have misunderstood the question.
Nemo
CC BY-SA 4.0
2021-12-03T23:04:17.987Z
You're right, the way I understand it now, you're asking how wording in surveys affects the broader population's understanding of terminology. Seeing that the original was tagged [demographics] and [psychology] I didn't think you were asking specifically about the UK example specifically. I still think this is mostly psychological: how do people perceive survey wording (as a participant or when they see the results)?
JJJ
CC BY-SA 4.0
2021-12-03T23:35:07.140Z
@JJJ I'm not sure this **longer term** sociological/political effect is the sort of thing psychologists study. Just thinking about the logistics of a longitudinal study on something like this makes me think the psychologists will not have much to say. How people form their views and influences on this seems more politics to me. Would it make it more of a politics question, in your view, if it was limited to the UK?
Nemo
CC BY-SA 4.0
2021-12-03T23:49:36.763Z
I'd say the UK example (or any specific example) is more political. The general question seems to me more about human behavior (and you could apply it to non-political marketing as well). For example, the long term effect of the wording of cattle vs. animals, cow vs. beef and pig vs. pork could be studied in the same spirit as this question (though *survey* might then be replaced with *ad campaign*). Of course that [wording can become a political issue](https://politics.stackexchange.com/q/59130), but the effects of the wording are psychological.
JJJ
CC BY-SA 4.0
2021-12-04T09:36:51.347Z
I think there is a difference between (1) psychological phenomena and (2) the things psychologists study. (1) is much wider than (2) because psychology is supposed to be an empirical science and there are practical limitations on what subjects the empirical method can be used in. An analogy might be weather forecasting and physics. In physics you can conduct experiments to show what happens to water when you apply sunlight to it, etc. but you can't conduct controlled experiments on the entirety of of Earth's atmosphere so meteorology it is a separate area of study.
Nemo
CC BY-SA 4.0
2021-12-04T09:42:53.277Z
@JJJ How the wording of cow v beef affects answers to the particular survey is a matter psychologists study but how the constant use of a wording in frequent surveys over decades affects the answers people give to future surveys I suspect is not the subject of study by psychologists. And if the wording concerned is political (small p) such as ethnicity then it seems to me that there is nowhere else for it to go other than Politics SE. When Theresa May talked about the Conservative Party appearing to be the "nasty party" I think that was analysed more by people studying politics than...
Nemo
CC BY-SA 4.0
2021-12-04T09:43:54.490Z
by psychologists even though that statement (and the phenomenon it refers to if true) would have a psychological effect.
Nemo
CC BY-SA 4.0
2021-12-04T19:12:19.960Z
Indeed this isn't a subject psychologists study. But it is something sociologists (and maybe linguists) do study and [sociology is on-topic here](https://psychology.meta.stackexchange.com/a/2151). Of course it has political implications, but it's not about politics primarily. Politics is about the decision making process but not necessarily about the effects in domains outside politics. This might be more of a nuanced discussion which is better suited for Politics Meta though. It similarly applies to other topics like climate and healthcare.
JJJ
<bias><survey><methodology><language>
Does the wording of official ethnicity questions influence perceptions in the longer term?
Nemo
# Does the wording of official ethnicity questions influence perceptions in the longer term?

(Asked by: username_0 on 2021-12-02)

It is well known that the sequence in which questions are asked in a survey can affect answers as earlier questions can influence the frame of mind in which a respondent answers a subsequent question. An illustration of this can be found in the BBC comedy series [*Yes Minister*](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G0ZZJXw4MTA).

My question is whether there has been any research into whether the wording of official surveys affects opinions **in the longer term**.

For example, if a respondent to an official survey [such as a census](https://politics.stackexchange.com/questions/69720/what-is-the-rationale-for-the-united-kingdom-statistics-body-not-allowing-black) is presented with a ethnicity question in the form of one large box entitled *White* containing tickbox options such as *British*, *English*, and *Welsh*, next to another large box entitled *Non-white* containing other options none of which is *British*, *English*, and *Welsh* then that will obviously (all other things being equal) increase the number of "white" people who choose *English* **in that particular survey** and decrease the number of "non-White" people who choose *English* **in that particular survey** even if *other (please specify)* write in options are freely available.

But has there been any research into the **longer-term effect** of such surveys? Does the frequent asking of the question in this way actually change perceptions of what is meant by *English* so as to cause some people to shift their viewpoint and start to believe that the term *English* as an ethnicity is limited to "white" people?

**Tags:** bias, survey, methodology, language

> **Comments:**
> **username_1**: Since this is primarily asking about survey methodology and how their structure influences respondents, I think it's indeed better suited for psychology. I'll migrate it there as I don't think there's a distinct link with politics.  
> **username_0**: @username_1 I think you have misunderstood the question.  
> **username_1**: You're right, the way I understand it now, you're asking how wording in surveys affects the broader population's understanding of terminology. Seeing that the original was tagged [demographics] and [psychology] I didn't think you were asking specifically about the UK example specifically. I still think this is mostly psychological: how do people perceive survey wording (as a participant or when they see the results)?  
> **username_0**: @username_1 I'm not sure this **longer term** sociological/political effect is the sort of thing psychologists study. Just thinking about the logistics of a longitudinal study on something like this makes me think the psychologists will not have much to say. How people form their views and influences on this seems more politics to me. Would it make it more of a politics question, in your view, if it was limited to the UK?  
> **username_1**: I'd say the UK example (or any specific example) is more political. The general question seems to me more about human behavior (and you could apply it to non-political marketing as well). For example, the long term effect of the wording of cattle vs. animals, cow vs. beef and pig vs. pork could be studied in the same spirit as this question (though *survey* might then be replaced with *ad campaign*). Of course that [wording can become a political issue](https://politics.stackexchange.com/q/59130), but the effects of the wording are psychological.  
> **username_0**: I think there is a difference between (1) psychological phenomena and (2) the things psychologists study. (1) is much wider than (2) because psychology is supposed to be an empirical science and there are practical limitations on what subjects the empirical method can be used in. An analogy might be weather forecasting and physics. In physics you can conduct experiments to show what happens to water when you apply sunlight to it, etc. but you can't conduct controlled experiments on the entirety of of Earth's atmosphere so meteorology it is a separate area of study.  
> **username_0**: @username_1 How the wording of cow v beef affects answers to the particular survey is a matter psychologists study but how the constant use of a wording in frequent surveys over decades affects the answers people give to future surveys I suspect is not the subject of study by psychologists. And if the wording concerned is political (small p) such as ethnicity then it seems to me that there is nowhere else for it to go other than Politics SE. When Theresa May talked about the Conservative Party appearing to be the "nasty party" I think that was analysed more by people studying politics than...  
> **username_0**: by psychologists even though that statement (and the phenomenon it refers to if true) would have a psychological effect.  
> **username_1**: Indeed this isn't a subject psychologists study. But it is something sociologists (and maybe linguists) do study and [sociology is on-topic here](https://psychology.meta.stackexchange.com/a/2151). Of course it has political implications, but it's not about politics primarily. Politics is about the decision making process but not necessarily about the effects in domains outside politics. This might be more of a nuanced discussion which is better suited for Politics Meta though. It similarly applies to other topics like climate and healthcare.  

---

## 0 answers

