Pretest-Datenbank

Projektname: German Internet Panel (GIP) – Module “Inflation” November Wave 2014 (English Version)

  1. Allgemeine Informationen: *Note: This/These items was/were tested in German. This/These is/are (an) English translation/s of the original German wording/s.*

    Both experimental conditions from question 2 are taken into account in this question. The two groups were compared in the evaluation in order to find differences in their answer behaviors.
  2. Fragetext: In question 2 you read the following information:
    Condition 1: The inflation expectations for the euro zone conincide with the aim of the European Central Bank to keep price increaes at a reasonable level.
    Condition 2: The inflation expectations for the euro zone coincide with the aim of the European Central Bank to keep price increaes at approximately 2 percent.
    How detailed do you find this information to be?

    [In Frage 2 haben Sie folgende Informationen gelesen:
    Bedingung 1: Die Inflationserwartung für die Eurozone deckt sich mit dem Ziel der Europäischen Zentralbank, die Preissteigerung auf angemessenem Niveau zu halten.
    Bedingung 2: Die Inflationserwartung für die Eurozone deckt sich mit dem Ziel der Europäischen Zentralbank, die Preissteigerung nahe 2 Prozent zu halten.
    Für wie detailliert halten Sie diese Information?]
  3. Antwortkategorien:

    Not detailed at all

    Little detailed

    Moderately detailed

    Pretty detailed

    Very detailed


    1. Empfehlungen: No changes recommended.
    1. Umsetzung der Empfehlungen: Yes
  1. Eingesetzte kognitive Technik/en: Category Selection Probing.
  2. Befund zur Frage: Overall the information is perceived as rather not detailed. More than half of the respondents (54%) state that the information is “not detailed at all” or “little detailed”. This is slightly more the case in condition 1 than in condition 2 (58.5% vs. 50%).

    The following things were criticized by the respondents:
    • 41% of the respondents think that the information is too general or too abstract (e.g. “As I said, I don’t know much about financial policy, for an average consumer the information is too general and not comprehensible at all”, ID 144; “Nowhere is explained how this goal should be achieved”, ID 89; “What are the reasons for this expectation?”, ID 107).
    • 32% of the participants in condition 1 criticize the term “appropriate/angemessen” as too vague (e.g. “Appropriate level is little specific”, ID 97).
    • 6% of the participants in condition 2 criticize the term “near/nahe” as too vague (e.g. “Near 2% is somewhere between 1% and 3% for me”, ID 98).
  1. Thema der Frage: Other Topics
  2. Konstrukt: Detailedness of the conditions (Question 2)