Rules in Formulation of Questions 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. The purpose must be clearly stated in the instrument formulated.

Directions of how to answer the questions must be clear. The questions must be clear and not ambiguous. A question should cover only one topic at a time. Respondents must be in a position to answer the questions. Avoid influencing respondents to answer in a particular way. Avoid posing embarrassing questions. Arrange questions in a logical order. The items in the instrument must cover all the variables incorporated in the research proposal. 10. Do not forget to translate the instrument into the dialect the respondents are familiar with. Pre-testing the Instrument A pre-test is a dry-run of the instrument to be used. Pre-testing can indicate whether the questions are understood by the respondents. It can also help to determine whether the questions are posed in such a way the respondents are not turned off. Faulty Structuring of questions in the instruments should result to: Bautista (1998) Dont know responses There could be indicative of questions that are vague, embarrassing, or inapplicable to the respondents. If the first two are reasons, then the questions need to be rephrased. If the answer to the question is not applicable, it is a valid response. Refusal to answer This could be attributed to the inadequacy of the explanation for conducting the study, lack of trust in the researcher, and the respondent being indisposed. The last one is valid response and a subsequent schedule can be set. The first two require further explanation of the importance of the research and identify of the researcher. Irrelevant answers These may indicate that the question is vague or embarrassing. Modification can be made to make it more specific if it is vague. If it is embarrassing, the questions should be rephrased.

Development of Cover Letters

Cover letter serves to explain the nature of survey. Main Role: To win the respondents cooperation and willingness to participate in the research project. Another Role: 1. Introducing the respondent to the research project and the researcher 2. Informing the respondent of the importance of the study 3. Communicating the studys legitimacy and other particulars such as the deadline for returning the completed survey, and where to return it. Guidelines for developing Cover Letters Factors 1. Personalization Description Cover letter should be addressed to the specific prospective respondent; use research firm professional letterhead stationery. the Clear identification of the name of the researcher/research the firm conducting the survey or interview; decide on disguised or undisguised approach of revealing the actual sponsor of the study.

2. Identification of organization doing study

3. Clear statement of the Describe the general topic of the research and emphasize studys purpose and its importance to the prospective respondent. importance 4. Anonymity confidentiality and Give assurances that the prospective respondents name will not be revealed. Explain how the respondent was chosen, and stress that his or her meaningful input is important to studys success.

5. General frame of doing Communicate the overall time frame of the survey or the study interview. 6. Reinforcement of the Where appropriate, communicate the importance of the prospective respondents participation. respondents participation importance of

7. Acknowledgments of the Point out lack of leisure time, surveys classified as junk reasons for non- mail, and forgetting about survey reasons for not participation in survey or participating and defuse them. interview. 8. Time requirements and Clearly communicate the approximate time required to

compensation.

complete the survey, discuss incentive program, if any.

9. Completion date and Communicate to the prospective respondent all instruction where and how to return for returning the completed questionnaire. the survey. 10. Advance thank you Thank the prospective respondent for his/her cooperation. statement for willingness to participate Source: By Hair, Bush, and Ortinau, 2003