Comprehensive survey and instrument design assistant supporting questionnaire construction, Likert scale design, question types (open/closed/matrix), response bias mitigation, sampling strategies (probability/non-probability), pilot testing, instrument validation (Cronbach's alpha, factor analysis), online survey tools (Qualtrics, REDCap, Google Forms), interview protocol development, focus group facilitation, mixed-mode surveys, and cultural adaptation of instruments. Use when designing a survey or questionnaire, building Likert scales, planning a sampling strategy, pilot testing, validating an instrument (Cronbach's alpha, factor analysis), developing an interview protocol, improving response rates, or working in Qualtrics or REDCap. For analyzing interview/focus-group data use alterlab-qualitative-methods; for qual+quant integration alterlab-mixed-methods; for test selection/power analysis alterlab-statistical-analysis; for IRB/consent alterlab-research-ethics. Part of the AlterLab Academic Skills suite.
Installer avec Codex ou Claude Copiez ce prompt, collez-le dans Codex, Claude ou un autre assistant, puis laissez-le vérifier la page du skill et l'installer pour vous.
Une commande directe contourne le prompt de vérification. Examinez la source avant de l'exécuter.
La commande reste sur une seule ligne. Faites défiler horizontalement pour la vérifier avant de la copier.
Vous préférez une copie locale ? Téléchargez les fichiers actuellement disponibles dans SkillsMP.
Explorateur de fichiers
7 fichiers
Affichage de SKILL.md
SKILL.md
Instructions source · Aperçu en lecture seule
name
alterlab-survey-design
description
Comprehensive survey and instrument design assistant supporting questionnaire construction, Likert scale design, question types (open/closed/matrix), response bias mitigation, sampling strategies (probability/non-probability), pilot testing, instrument validation (Cronbach's alpha, factor analysis), online survey tools (Qualtrics, REDCap, Google Forms), interview protocol development, focus group facilitation, mixed-mode surveys, and cultural adaptation of instruments. Use when designing a survey or questionnaire, building Likert scales, planning a sampling strategy, pilot testing, validating an instrument (Cronbach's alpha, factor analysis), developing an interview protocol, improving response rates, or working in Qualtrics or REDCap. For analyzing interview/focus-group data use alterlab-qualitative-methods; for qual+quant integration alterlab-mixed-methods; for test selection/power analysis alterlab-statistical-analysis; for IRB/consent alterlab-research-ethics. Part of the AlterLab Academic Skills suite.
license
MIT
allowed-tools
Read WebFetch WebSearch Bash(python:*)
compatibility
No API key required. Guidance-focused skill; uses WebFetch/WebSearch and optional Python helpers via `uv run python`.
A comprehensive survey and instrument design tool for faculty and researchers. Covers the full lifecycle of survey-based research: from construct definition and item writing through pilot testing, validation, deployment, and analysis of survey data.
Overview
Survey research is one of the most widely used methods across social sciences, health sciences, education, and business. Despite its apparent simplicity, designing a valid and reliable survey instrument requires systematic attention to construct definition, item wording, response format, sampling, bias mitigation, and psychometric validation.
This skill treats survey design as a scientific process, not an art. Every design decision should be justified and documented.
When to Use This Skill
This skill should be used when:
Designing a new survey or questionnaire from scratch
Adapting an existing instrument for a new population or context
Writing Likert-scale items or other structured response formats
Developing interview protocols or focus group guides
Planning sampling strategies for survey research
Conducting pilot tests and cognitive interviews
Validating instruments (reliability and validity analysis)
Selecting online survey platforms (Qualtrics, REDCap, Google Forms)
Improving response rates and reducing bias
Conducting cultural adaptation and translation of instruments
Teaching research methods courses that include survey design
Does NOT Trigger
Scenario
Use Instead
Qualitative data analysis (coding, themes, focus group/interview analysis)
alterlab-qualitative-methods
Integrating qual + quant strands (convergent/sequential designs, joint displays)
alterlab-mixed-methods
Hypothesis-test selection, assumption checks, power analysis beyond validation
Ethics/IRB applications, informed consent for survey research
alterlab-research-ethics
Core Capabilities
1. Survey Design Process
The 10-Step Survey Design Framework:
Step 1: Define research objectives and constructs
What do you want to measure? What are your research questions?
│
Step 2: Review existing instruments
Has someone already validated an instrument for your construct?
│
Step 3: Define the target population and sampling frame
Who will you survey? How will you reach them?
│
Step 4: Choose survey mode
Online, paper, phone, in-person, mixed-mode?
│
Step 5: Write items and response options
Craft questions that are clear, unambiguous, and aligned to constructs
│
Step 6: Design survey structure and flow
Organize sections, add skip logic, manage survey length
│
Step 7: Expert review
Subject matter experts and methodologists evaluate the instrument
│
Step 8: Cognitive interviews and pilot testing
Test with a small sample from the target population
│
Step 9: Psychometric validation
Reliability analysis, factor analysis, validity assessment
│
Step 10: Deploy, monitor, and analyze
Launch survey, track response rates, clean and analyze data
2. Construct Definition and Operationalization
Before writing a single item, define what you are measuring. Map each construct to its dimensions, indicators, distinct-but-related constructs, and a nomological network so every item traces back to something specific.
Full Construct Mapping Template: see references/item_writing_and_scales.md.
3. Item Writing
Question Types and When to Use Them
Type
Format
Best For
Closed-ended (single choice)
Radio buttons
Mutually exclusive categories
Closed-ended (multiple choice)
Checkboxes
Non-mutually exclusive categories
Likert scale
Rating scale
Attitudes, perceptions, frequency
Semantic differential
Bipolar scale
Evaluative judgments
Ranking
Drag-and-drop or numbered
Forced prioritization
Matrix/Grid
Likert items in table
Multiple items with same response scale
Open-ended
Text box
Exploratory, rich responses
Numeric
Number input
Precise quantities
Visual analog scale (VAS)
Slider
Continuous measurement
Likert Scale — Number of Points
Points
Trade-off
Use When
4-point
Forces a choice (no midpoint)
Avoid social desirability midpoint clustering
5-point
Most common, well-understood; central-tendency bias
Standard attitudinal measurement
6-point
Forced choice with more granularity
Force direction with more options
7-point
Greater discrimination; better for factor analysis
Established psychometric instruments
Item-writing essentials — DO: simple/clear language; one concept per item (no double-barreled); specific time frames; match scale to stem; pilot with the target population; over-generate items. DO NOT: leading/loaded language; double negatives; assume knowledge; use absolutes; write overly long items; ask about hypotheticals when you mean actual behavior.
Full question-type examples, Likert labeling schemes, the complete DO / DO NOT rules, and worked before/after item revisions: see references/item_writing_and_scales.md.
4. Survey Structure and Flow
Organize the instrument as: welcome + consent → screening → main content grouped by construct (easy questions first, sensitive items mid-survey) → demographics at the end → thank-you/debrief. Use skip logic to hide irrelevant questions and route ineligible respondents.
Full Survey Structure Template and Skip Logic Design examples: see references/item_writing_and_scales.md.
5. Sampling Strategies
Probability Sampling (every member has a known, non-zero chance of selection; generalizable):
Method
How It Works
Trade-off
Simple random
Select randomly from complete list
Unbiased, but needs a complete sampling frame
Systematic
Select every kth element
Easy, but periodicity risk if list has a pattern
Stratified
Random sample within population strata
Ensures subgroup representation; needs population knowledge
Cluster
Randomly select clusters, then sample within
Practical without individual list; higher sampling error
Multi-stage
Combine methods (cluster then stratified)
Flexible for large populations; complex to analyze
Non-Probability Sampling (no representativeness guarantee):
Method
How It Works
Trade-off
Convenience
Recruit whoever is available
Fast/cheap, but strong bias
Purposive
Select on specific criteria
Targets relevant subgroups; researcher bias
Snowball
Participants recruit others
Reaches hidden populations; biased toward the connected
Quota
Convenience sample within subgroup quotas
Ensures diversity; not truly random within quotas
Size the sample with the proportion formula n = (Z² × p × (1-p)) / E² for descriptive surveys (adjusting for finite population and expected response rate), or a power analysis for comparative surveys. Worked sample-size formulas and the Python two-group power-analysis helper: see references/sampling_and_power.md.
6. Response Bias Mitigation
Bias Type
Definition
Mitigation Strategies
Social desirability
Respondents answer in ways they believe are socially acceptable
Anonymous data collection; indirect questioning; validated social desirability scales (e.g., Marlowe-Crowne)
Acquiescence
Tendency to agree with statements regardless of content
Mix positively and negatively worded items; use forced-choice formats
Central tendency
Tendency to select middle response options
Use even-point scales (no midpoint); provide behavioral anchors
Extreme responding
Tendency to select extreme endpoints
Use more response options (7-point); provide clear anchor descriptions
Order effects
Earlier questions influence responses to later questions
Randomize item order within sections; counterbalance across respondents
Nonresponse bias
Systematic differences between responders and non-responders
Follow-up reminders; analyze early vs. late responders; compare demographics to population
Recall bias
Inaccurate recall of past events
Use shorter recall periods; provide memory aids; use event-specific prompts
Common method bias
Inflated correlations due to same measurement method
Use different measurement methods; temporal separation; marker variables
7. Pilot Testing
Run a three-phase pilot before full deployment: (1) expert review for content/face validity (CVI thresholds: Item-CVI ≥ 0.78, Scale-CVI/Ave ≥ 0.90); (2) cognitive interviews (n = 5-10) using think-aloud and probing questions; (3) a quantitative pilot (n = 30-50) assessing completion, missing data, distributions, internal consistency, and item-total correlations.
Full phase-by-phase protocol with probe scripts and the quantitative-pilot checklist: see references/pilot_and_validation.md.
8. Instrument Validation
Assess reliability (Cronbach's alpha per subscale, corrected item-total correlations — flag items < 0.30) and validity across the evidence types below. Use exploratory factor analysis (Bartlett's test, KMO, eigenvalues, rotated loadings) to check internal structure.
Type
Question
Method
Content validity
Do items cover the construct adequately?
Expert review, CVI calculation
Face validity
Do items appear to measure the construct?
Target population review
Construct validity
Does it measure the theoretical construct?
Factor analysis (EFA/CFA)
Convergent validity
Does it correlate with similar measures?
Correlation with established instruments (r > 0.50)
Discriminant validity
Is it distinct from different constructs?
Low correlation with unrelated measures (r < 0.30)
Criterion (concurrent)
Does it correlate with a current criterion?
Correlation with gold standard, measured simultaneously
Criterion (predictive)
Does it predict a future outcome?
Correlation with criterion measured later
Known-groups
Can it distinguish groups known to differ?
Compare scores between groups that should differ
Runnable Python for Cronbach's alpha, item-total correlations, EFA, and the three-phase pilot protocol: see references/pilot_and_validation.md. For CFA fit indices, measurement invariance, and the broader psychometric framework, see references/survey-methodology.md.
9. Online Survey Platform Comparison
Feature
Qualtrics
REDCap
Google Forms
LimeSurvey
Cost
Institutional license (expensive)
Free for institutions
Free
Free (open source)
Skip logic
Advanced
Advanced
Basic
Advanced
Randomization
Yes (items, blocks)
Limited
No
Yes
Piping
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Offline data collection
Yes (app)
Yes (app)
No
Yes
HIPAA compliant
Yes (BAA available)
Yes (designed for it)
No
Self-hosted: yes
API access
Yes
Yes
Limited
Yes
Data export
CSV, SPSS, Excel
CSV, Excel, SPSS, SAS, R, Stata
CSV, Excel
CSV, Excel, SPSS, R
Multi-language
Yes
Yes
Manual
Yes
Panel integration
Yes (Prolific, MTurk)
No
No
Limited
Best for
Complex academic surveys
Clinical and health research
Simple surveys, course evaluations
Budget-conscious complex surveys
10. Interview Protocol Development
Build semi-structured interview guides with a scripted opening/consent, a warm-up question, main-question blocks organized by construct (each with probes), a closing catch-all, and a post-interview field-notes routine.
Full Semi-Structured Interview Guide Template: see references/qualitative_protocols.md.
11. Focus Group Facilitation
Plan groups of 6-10 (4-6 for complex topics), 3-5 groups per segment until saturation, homogeneous within and heterogeneous across. Assign moderator and note-taker roles, prepare a neutral environment, and use funnel-approach facilitation to manage dominant and quiet voices.
Full Focus Group Design Checklist: see references/qualitative_protocols.md.
12. Cultural Adaptation of Instruments
Adapt instruments across languages/cultures using Brislin's (1970) back-translation cycle (forward translation → independent back-translation → reconciliation → cultural review → cognitive interviews → validation) and the 10-step ISPOR cross-cultural adaptation guidelines.
Full back-translation flow diagram and ISPOR step list: see references/qualitative_protocols.md.
Best Practices
Start with constructs, not questions. Define exactly what you are measuring before writing a single item. Each item should trace back to a specific construct or dimension.
Use existing validated instruments when possible. Do not reinvent the wheel. Search the literature for instruments with established psychometric properties.
Pilot everything. Every survey should go through cognitive interviews and a quantitative pilot before full deployment. There is no substitute for testing with your target population.
Keep it short. Every additional item increases dropout risk. Include only items you will actually analyze. A good survey is as short as possible and as long as necessary.
Design for your weakest respondent. Write at an appropriate reading level. Test on mobile devices. Consider accessibility (screen readers, color contrast). Provide translations if needed.
Randomize item order within sections. This reduces order effects and helps detect careless responding.
Include attention checks. Embed 1-2 instructed response items (e.g., "Please select 'Agree' for this item") to identify careless respondents.
Plan your analysis before collecting data. Every question should have a purpose in your analysis plan. If you cannot say how you will analyze an item, remove it.
Document everything. Keep a survey design log recording every decision: why items were added, removed, or revised; pilot test results; expert feedback.
Protect respondent data. Use anonymous links when possible; store data securely; minimize collection of identifiers; comply with IRB requirements.
Common Pitfalls
Pitfall
Why It Happens
How to Avoid
Double-barreled questions
Trying to be efficient; asking two things at once
Split into separate items; one concept per item
Leading questions
Researcher's hypothesis influences wording
Have a colleague blind to your hypothesis review items
Response options that do not match the stem
Copy-pasting from another survey
Ensure stem and response scale are grammatically and logically matched
Too many open-ended questions
Wanting rich data
Limit to 2-3 open-ended items; save depth for interviews
No pilot testing
Time pressure; overconfidence in item clarity
Always pilot — even a quick cognitive interview with 3-5 people helps
Ignoring mobile respondents
Designing on desktop
Test on multiple devices; avoid matrix questions on mobile (they break)
Assuming items are valid because they "look right"
Run reliability and factor analysis; report results in your paper
Convenience sampling reported as representative
Not understanding sampling limitations
Be honest about sampling method in limitations section
Cultural insensitivity
Assuming instruments transfer across cultures
Use formal adaptation procedures (back-translation, cognitive interviews)
References
DeVellis, R. F., & Thorpe, C. T. (2022). Scale development: Theory and applications (5th ed.). Sage.
Dillman, D. A., Smyth, J. D., & Christian, L. M. (2014). Internet, phone, mail, and mixed-mode surveys: The tailored design method (4th ed.). Wiley.
Fowler, F. J. (2014). Survey research methods (5th ed.). Sage.
Groves, R. M., Fowler, F. J., Couper, M. P., Lepkowski, J. M., Singer, E., & Tourangeau, R. (2009). Survey methodology (2nd ed.). Wiley.
Krosnick, J. A., & Presser, S. (2010). Question and questionnaire design. In P. V. Marsden & J. D. Wright (Eds.), Handbook of survey research (2nd ed., pp. 263-313). Emerald.
Podsakoff, P. M., MacKenzie, S. B., Lee, J. Y., & Podsakoff, N. P. (2003). Common method biases in behavioral research. Journal of Applied Psychology, 88(5), 879-903.
Willis, G. B. (2005). Cognitive interviewing: A tool for improving questionnaire design. Sage.
See also: references/survey-methodology.md for expanded methodology details.
