Wednesday 9:00-11:30 am
245 O’Neill Library
Professor: Sara Moorman
Office: 404 McGuinn Hall
Office hours: Wednesday 3:00-5:00 pm
E-mail: moormans@bc.edu
About the Course
This applied course is designed for undergraduate students with a prior background in statistics at the level of SOCY2200 (Statistics) and for graduate students with a prior background in statistics at the level of SOCY7702 (Introduction to Statistics and Data Analysis). The course will lead students through the design, collection, and analysis of their own surveys. Major topics will include research ethics, sampling, item selection, modes of response, interviewer effects, nonresponse, and data management and analysis. Qualtrics and SPSS will be used to design internet surveys and analyze the resulting data, respectively.
Required Books
The bookstore has ordered:

Beam, George. 2012. The Problem with Survey Research . (ISBN 9781412846035)

Fink, Arlene. 2009. How to Conduct Surveys: A Step-by-Step Guide (4 th
edition). (ISBN
9781412966689)
These books are also available on 2-hour reserve at O’Neill.
Course Reserves Online
Access additional readings as .pdf files through the library website or through the link on the course Canvas page.
Accommodations
If you are a student with a documented disability seeking reasonable accommodations in this course, please contact Kathy Duggan, (617) 552-8093, dugganka@bc.edu, at the Connors Family
Learning Center regarding learning disabilities and ADHD, or Paulette Durrett, (617) 552-3470, paulette.durrett@bc.edu, in the Disability Services Office regarding all other types of disabilities, including temporary disabilities. Advance notice and appropriate documentation are required for accommodations.

SOCY5516-01: Survey Methodology
Schedule
2
September 3: The Survey in Social Science Research
1) Fink Chapter 1
2)
Lipka, Sara. 2011. “Want Data? Ask Students. Again and Again.”
The Chronicle of
Higher Education , August 7. (http://chronicle.com/article/Want-Data-Ask-Students-
Again/128537/)
3) Kamenetz, Anya. 2014. “’Mischievous Responders’ Confound Research on Teens.”
National Public Radio , May 22.
(http://www.npr.org/blogs/ed/2014/05/22/313166161/mischievous-responders-confoundresearch-on-teens)
4) Schaeffer, Nora Cate and Stanley Presser. 2003. “The Science of Asking Questions.”
American Sociological Review 29: 65-88.
5) Schaeffer, Nora Cate and Jennifer Dykema. 2011. “Questions for Surveys: Current
Trends and Future Directions.”
Public Opinion Quarterly 75(5): 909-61. (READ
THROUGH PAGE 931)
September 10: Sampling I
1) Fink chapter 4
2) First half of Beam
September 17: Sampling II
1) Fink chapter 5
2) Second half of Beam
September 24: Asking about Events and Behaviors: Self-Reports as Statements of Identity
1)
Brenner, Philip S. 2014. “Testing the Veracity of Self-Reported Religious Behavior in the
Muslim World.” Social Forces 92(3): 1009-1037.
2)
Burke, Peter J. 1980. “The Self: Measurement Requirements from an Interactionist
Perspective.”
Social Psychology Quarterly 43(1): 18-29.
3) Fink Chapter 2
4) Pape, Hilde and Elisabet E. Storvoll. 2006. “Teenagers’ ‘Use’ of Non-Existent Drugs.”
Nordisk Alkohol & Narkotikatidskrift (English Supplement) 23: 43-58.

SOCY5516-01: Survey Methodology 3
October 1: Asking about Events and Behaviors: Reporting in Good Faith, but Incorrectly or
Unverifiably
1) Brown, Norman R. and Robert C. Sinclair. 1999. “Estimating Number of Lifetime Sexual
Partners: Men and Women Do It Differently.”
The Journal of Sex Research 36(3): 292-
297.
2) Fink Chapter 3
3)
Keefe, Francis J. 2000. “Self-Report of Pain: Issues and Opportunities.” Pp. 317-337 in
The Science of Self Report , edited by A.A. Stone, J. S. Turkkan, C.A. Bachrach, J.B.
Jobe, H.S. Kurtzman, and V. S. Cain. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
4) Loftus, Elizabeth F. 2000. “Suggestion, Imagination, and the Transformation of Reality.”
Pp. 201-210 in The Science of Self Report , edited by A.A. Stone, J. S. Turkkan, C.A.
Bachrach, J.B. Jobe, H.S. Kurtzman, and V. S. Cain. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
October 8: Asking about Attitudes and Opinions: Nuts and Bolts
1) Bohner, Gerd and Nina Dickel. 2011. “Attitudes and Attitude Change.” Annual Review of
Psychology 62: 391-417.
2)
Schuman, Howard and Stanley Presser. 1996. “Measuring a Middle Position.” Pp. 161-
178 in Questions and Answers in Attitude Surveys . Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
3) Schuman, Howard and Stanley Presser. 1996. “The Acquiescence Quagmire.” Pp. 203-
230 in Questions and Answers in Attitude Surveys . Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
4) Tourangeau, Roger and Mirta Galesic. 2007. “Conceptions of Attitudes and Opinions.”
Pp. 141-154 in The Sage Handbook of Public Opinion Research , edited by M. W.
Traugott and W. Donsbach. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
October 15: Designing Web Surveys in Qualtrics
1) De Leeuw, Edith. 2008. “Choosing the Method of Data Collection.” Pp 113-135 in The
International Handbook of Survey Methodology , edited by E. D. De Leeuw, J. Hox, and
D. Dillman. New York, NY: Psychology Press.
2) Dillman, Don A. and Jolene D. Smith. 2007. “Design Effects in the Transition to Web-
Based Surveys.”
American Journal of Preventive Medicine 32: S90-S96.
October 22: Asking About Attitudes and Opinions: Social Theory
1) Burstein, Paul. 2009. “Public Opinion, Public Policy, and Democracy.” Pp. 63-78 in
Handbook of Politics: State and Society in Global Perspective , edited by K. T. Leicht and
J. C. Jenkins. New York, NY: Springer.
2)
Gilens, Martin. 2005. “Inequality and Democratic Responsiveness.”
Public Opinion
Quarterly 69(5): 778-796.
3) Manza, Jeff and Clem Brooks. 2012. “How Sociology Lost Public Opinion.” Sociological
Theory 30(2): 89-113.
4) Perrin, Andrew J. and Katherine McFarland. 2011. “Social Theory and Public Opinion.”
Annual Review of Sociology 37:87-107 .

SOCY5516-01: Survey Methodology
October 29: Asking About Attitudes and Opinions: The Role of Polling in U.S. Elections
1)
Graefe, Andreas. 2014. “Accuracy of Vote Expectation Surveys in Forecasting
Elections.” Public Opinion Quarterly 78(S1): 204-232.
2)
Rosenstiel, Tom. 2005. “Political Polling and the New Media Culture: A Case of More
Being Less.”
Public Opinion Quarterly 69(5): 698-715.
3) Wheeler, Michael. 1976. “Political Poll-Vaulting.” Pp. 176-200 in Lies, Damned Lies, and Statistics: The Manipulation of Public Opinion in America . New York, NY: W. W.
Norton.
4) Wheeler, Michael. 1976. “Policing the Polls.” Pp. 245-269 in Lies, Damned Lies, and
Statistics: The Manipulation of Public Opinion in America . New York, NY: W. W.
Norton.
4
November 5: Asking About Attitudes and Opinions: Persuasion
1)
Dholakia, Uptal M. and Vicki G. Morwitz. 2002. “The Scope and Persistence of Mere
Measurement Effects.”
Journal of Consumer Research 29(2): 159-167.
2) Machin, Jane E. and Gavan J. Fitzsimons. 2005. “Marketing by Mistake: The Unintended
Consequences of Consumer Research.” Pp. 81-95 in Applying Social Cognition to
Consumer-Focused Strategy, edited by F. R. Kardes, P. M. Herr, and J. A. Nantel.
Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
3) Visser, Penny S., Allyson Holbrook, and Jon A. Krosnick. 2007. “Knowledge and
Attitudes.” Pp. 127-140 in
The Sage Handbook of Public Opinion Research , edited by M.
W. Traugott and W. Donsbach. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
4) Wood, Wendy. 2000. “Attitude Change: Persuasion and Social Influence.” Annual
Review of Psychology 51: 539-570.
November 12: Data Management, with a focus on Nonparticipation and Missing Data
1) Johnson, David R. and Rebekah Young. 2011. “Toward Best Practices in Analyzing
Datasets with Missing Data: Comparisons and Recommendations.”
Journal of Marriage and Family 73(5): 926-945.
2)
Lynn, Peter. 2008. “The Problem of Nonresponse.” Pp 35-55 in The International
Handbook of Survey Methodology, edited by E. D. De Leeuw, J. Hox, and D. Dillman.
New York, NY: Psychology Press.
November 19: Data Analysis and Reporting Survey Results
1) Fink chapter 6
2) Fink chapter 7
***November 26 is part of Thanksgiving break***
December 3: Class Presentations
-no reading-
December 10: Class Presentations
-no reading-

SOCY5516-01: Survey Methodology
Assessment
5
Grading scale
A+ none at Boston College
B+ 87 – 89%
C+ 77 – 79%
D+
F
67 – 69% below 60%
Task
Participation
Beam rebuttal
Sampling
A
B
C
D
93 – 100%
83 – 86%
73 – 76%
63 – 66%
Due date
Throughout
October 1
October 15
A-
B-
C-
D-
90 – 92%
80 – 82%
70 – 72%
60 – 62%
Percentage of grade
10
10
15
Item selection
Survey design
Class presentation
Ethics training
Results and Analysis
October 29
November 12
December 3/10
December 17
December 17
15
15
15
5
15
Assignment Submission
All written assignments are to be uploaded to Canvas by 11:59 pm Eastern time on the due date.
Papers submitted after 11:59 pm on the due date are late and will lose a letter grade a day. That is, a paper submitted on time is worth, at best, an A. A paper submitted between midnight and
11:59 pm of the day following the due date is worth, at best, a B. If you wish to avoid the late penalty, you must make arrangements with me in advance, or you must provide proof of extenuating circumstances (e.g., doctor’s note, funeral program).
Academic Honesty
Your work must be your words and ideas. When writing papers, use quotation marks around someone else’s exact words and identify whose words they are. If you come across a good idea, by all means use it in your writing, but be sure to acknowledge whose idea it is. Failure to comply will result in (a) automatic failure of the assignment, and (b) a report to the Dean and the
Committee on Academic Integrity. For further information, please review the College’s policies on academic integrity here: http://www.bc.edu/content/bc/offices/stserv/academic/integrity.html