{"title":"Disjunctive answer options complicate communication – a linguistic analysis of the danish EQ-5D (5 L) version","authors":"Esben Nedenskov Petersen, Birgitte Nørgaard","doi":"10.1007/s10742-023-00300-7","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Introduction: EQ-5D is an internationally acknowledged tool for assessing health-related quality of life. Our aim was to examine how pragmatic dynamics may influence answers to the EQ-5D-5 L in items where the structure of answer options is disjunctive. Methods: We performed a 3-step linguistic analysis building on the seminal work of Grice, including (1) examination of the lexical meanings of the answer options, (2) considerations of how conversational maxims might affect the respondent’s interpretation of compatible answer options under a single item, and (3) analysis of how the questionnaire’s context might counteract the problem of omitted answer options by shifting the meaning of context-sensitive expressions. Results: All items with disjunctive answer options exhibit both compatibilities and omissions. In combination with the disjunctive form of answer options these features of the EQ-5D-5 L complicates the communicative task for respondents relying on conversational norms to identify the most suitable answers to the instrument’s questions. Discussion: In items where answer options have a disjunctive structure, respondents relying on Gricean conversational maxims will have to depend on their individual understanding of fine-grained details concerning the questionnaire’s purpose and may have to weigh how conflicting norms should be balanced. While such dynamics are likely to go undetected in cognitive interviews, linguistic analysis may help to identify them.","PeriodicalId":45600,"journal":{"name":"Health Services and Outcomes Research Methodology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.6000,"publicationDate":"2023-02-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Health Services and Outcomes Research Methodology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10742-023-00300-7","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Introduction: EQ-5D is an internationally acknowledged tool for assessing health-related quality of life. Our aim was to examine how pragmatic dynamics may influence answers to the EQ-5D-5 L in items where the structure of answer options is disjunctive. Methods: We performed a 3-step linguistic analysis building on the seminal work of Grice, including (1) examination of the lexical meanings of the answer options, (2) considerations of how conversational maxims might affect the respondent’s interpretation of compatible answer options under a single item, and (3) analysis of how the questionnaire’s context might counteract the problem of omitted answer options by shifting the meaning of context-sensitive expressions. Results: All items with disjunctive answer options exhibit both compatibilities and omissions. In combination with the disjunctive form of answer options these features of the EQ-5D-5 L complicates the communicative task for respondents relying on conversational norms to identify the most suitable answers to the instrument’s questions. Discussion: In items where answer options have a disjunctive structure, respondents relying on Gricean conversational maxims will have to depend on their individual understanding of fine-grained details concerning the questionnaire’s purpose and may have to weigh how conflicting norms should be balanced. While such dynamics are likely to go undetected in cognitive interviews, linguistic analysis may help to identify them.
期刊介绍:
The journal reflects the multidisciplinary nature of the field of health services and outcomes research. It addresses the needs of multiple, interlocking communities, including methodologists in statistics, econometrics, social and behavioral sciences; designers and analysts of health policy and health services research projects; and health care providers and policy makers who need to properly understand and evaluate the results of published research. The journal strives to enhance the level of methodologic rigor in health services and outcomes research and contributes to the development of methodologic standards in the field. In pursuing its main objective, the journal also provides a meeting ground for researchers from a number of traditional disciplines and fosters the development of new quantitative, qualitative, and mixed methods by statisticians, econometricians, health services researchers, and methodologists in other fields. Health Services and Outcomes Research Methodology publishes: Research papers on quantitative, qualitative, and mixed methods; Case Studies describing applications of quantitative and qualitative methodology in health services and outcomes research; Review Articles synthesizing and popularizing methodologic developments; Tutorials; Articles on computational issues and software reviews; Book reviews; and Notices. Special issues will be devoted to papers presented at important workshops and conferences.