Foredrag og samtaler

From Open Text to Tick Boxes: Question Format Effects on Public Support for Carbon Capture and Storage


Gisle Andersen, forsker 1 hos NORCE, presenterer en artikkel han har skrevet sammen med Christine Merk og Åsta Dyrnes Nordø.

Gisle Andersen er forsker 1 hos NORCE. I denne presentasjonen legger Gisle frem en artikkel han har skrevet sammen med Christine Merk og Åsta Dyrnes Nordø, som undersøker hvordan holdninger til fremvoksende teknologier måles ved hjelp av standardiserte lukkede spørsmål i spørreundersøkelser, med karbonfangst og ‑lagring (CCS) som eksempel.

Presentasjonen blir på engelsk. En lett lunsj blir servert, etter førstemann til mølla-prinsippet.

Arrangementet er hybrid, så om du ikke kan komme kan du delta digitalt. (ekstern lenke).

Velkommen!

Engelsk sammendrag

Public attitudes towards emerging, technically complex climate technologies are difficult to measure with standard closed-ended survey items. When issues are low in salience, closed formats may elicit satisficing and pseudo-opinions, thereby masking ambivalence. We examine these dynamics for carbon capture and storage (CCS) using a probability-based online survey(n = 3,068). Respondents first read a brief information text and provided open-ended written responses. They then answered a closed-ended forced-choice question on their stance toward CCS.

 

We show that the question format fundamentally influences measured public attitudes toward CCS. “No opinion” was selected by 23% in the closed-ended item but was coded in only 4% of the open-ended answers, while item nonresponse was higher for the open-ended question (14% vs. 0.4%). Within-person comparisons show that respondents who expressed conditional support or uncertainty in open text responses often chose “positive” when constrained by predefined categories. Open-ended elaboration is socially patterned, indicating that each format carries distinct biases.

 

These findings highlight a measurement trade-off: closed-ended items maximize efficiency and response rates but can overstate support and underestimate complexity, whereas open-ended items reveal ambivalence yet impose greater respondent burden.