Abstract
Survey is one of the most common data gathering techniques used by researchers, but there are times where it is hard to collect enough data from respondents because some are repelled to answering these surveys. Some of the reasons that cause these hindrances may be attributed to aesthetic reasons or the length of the survey. Employing the concepts of usability ergonomics and different studies concerned with survey questionnaire response quality, this study aims to assess the different survey forms of the fast food forms of the fast food companies and make recommendations regarding how their survey forms should be changed with regards to both structure and physical appearance by collecting and comparing these questionnaires and analyze factors which affect the quality of data gathered from these survey questionnaires. This study checked the customer feedback questionnaires of various companies and synthesize it to develop general guidelines in creating survey questionnaires for fast food chains. Lastly, based on the guidelines produced, a survey questionnaire was made to show what survey questionnaire would solicit the best quality answer from the respondents. This particular fabricated questionnaire contain the factors which causes the least fatigue on the respondents and at the same time lacks the aspects which discourages the respondent from answering without proper disposition. In conclusion, the results of this study showed that the survey questionnaires of food establishments contain flaws regarding the elements that are contained within them. These flaws are focused on the following aspects: overall visual presentation of the questionnaire itself, font, the manner of transmission of the questionnaire, its general structure of question and its perceived length. Thus this study recommends to test the proposed customer feedback questionnaire in an actual food establishment environment and use statistical proofs to test its effectiveness.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Market Surveys Definition - Entrepreneur Small Business Encyclopedia. Entrepreneur (2018). https://www.entrepreneur.com/encyclopedia/market-surveys. Accessed 20 Sept 2018
Mathers, N., Fox, N., Hunn, A.: Surveys and Questionnaires. The NIHR RDS for the East Midlands/Yorkshire & the Humber (2007). https://www.rds-yh.nihr.ac.uk/wp-content/uploads/2013/05/12_Surveys_and_Questionnaires_Revision_2009.pdf. Accessed Sept 2018
Cohen, L., Manion, L., Morrison, K.: Research Methods in Education. Islmblogblog.files.wordpress.com (2007). https://islmblogblog.files.wordpress.com/2016/05/rme-edu-helpline-blogspot-com.pdf. Accessed 9 Sept 2018
Rietz, I., Wahl, S.: Vergleich von Selbst- und Fremdbild von PsychologInnen im Internet und auf Papier. In: Batinic, B., Werner, A., Gräf, L., Bandilla, W. (eds.) Online Research. Methoden, Anwendungen, und Ergebnisse, pp. 77–92. Hogrefe, Göttingen (1999)
Kanuk, L., Berenson, C.: Mail surveys and response rates: a literature review. J. Mark. Res. 12, 440–453 (1975)
Plass, J., Heidig, S., Hayward, E., Homer, B., Um, E.: Emotional design in multimedia learning: effects of shape and color on affect and learning. Learn. Instr. 29, 128–140 (2014). https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0959475213000273
Thompson, K.C.: Computational Assessment of Text Readability: A Survey of Current and Future Research, 8 September 2014. http://www-personal.umich.edu/~kevynct/pubs/ITL-readability-invited-article-v10-camera.pdf. Accessed 8 Dec 2018
Bernard, M., Lida, B., Riley, S., et al.: A comparison of popular online fonts: which size and type is best? Usability News 4(1) (2002). http://www.tbook.it/download/Usability_News%20.pdf. Accessed 8 Dec 2018
Reja, U., Manfreda, K., Hlebec, V., Vehovar, V.: Open-ended vs Close-ended Questions in Web Questionnaires (2003). https://www.stat-d.si/mz/mz19/reja.pdf. Accessed Sept 2018
Harrison, D.A., McLaughlin, M.E.: Exploring the cognitive processes underlying responses to self-report instruments: effects of item content on work attitude measures. In: Proceedings of the 1991 Academy of Management annual meetings, vol. 1991, no. 1, pp. 310–314 (1991). Academy of Management. https://journals.aom.org/doi/abs/10.5465/ambpp.1991.4977169. Accessed 9 Sept 2018
Schmitt, N.W., Stults, D.M.: Factors defined by negatively keyed items: the results of careless respondents? Appl. Psychol. Meas. 9(4), 367–373 (1985). Research Gate. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/247742452_Factors_Defined_by_Negatively_Keyed_Items_The_Result_of_Careless_Respondents. Accessed 9 Sept 2018
Carmines, E.G., Zeller, R.A.: Reliability and Validity Assessment. Sage, Beverly Hills (1979)
Harvey, R.J., Billings, R.S., Nilan, K.J.: Confirmatory factor analysis of the job diagnostic survey: good news and bad news. J. Appl. Psychol. 70(3), 461–468 (1985). https://repository.up.ac.za/bitstream/handle/2263/3134/Buys_Construct%282007%29.pdf?sequence=1. Accessed 9 Dec 2018
Tourangeau, P.: Sensitive Questions in Surveys. https://www.learnlab.org/research/wiki/images/a/a8/Tourangeau_SensitiveQuestions.pdf. Accessed Sept 2018
Dillman, D.: Constructing the questionnaire. Mail and internet surveys. Wiley, New York (2000). http://faculty.washington.edu/jelmore/articles_online/Dillman-Des%26Admin_Ma.pdf. Accessed Sept 2018
Ekeh, P.: Social Exchange Theory: The Two Traditions. Harvard University Press, Cambridge (1974). Accessed Sept 2018
Hinkin, T.R.: A Brief Tutorial on the Development of Measures for Use in Survey Questionnaires (1998). https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/0584/b34bb01fd11c3b16ffb97e4ce3bf0bbc412e.pdf. Accessed Sept 2018
Wanke, M.: Comparative Judgements as a Function of the Direction of Comparison Versus Word Order, 1 January 1996. https://academic.oup.com/poq/article-abstract/60/3/400/1832316?redirectedFrom=fulltext. Accessed Sept 2018
Fanning, E.: Formatting a paper-based survey questionnaire: best practices. Pract. Assess. Res. Eval. 10(12) (2005). https://pareonline.net/getvn.asp?v=10&n=12. Accessed 8 Dec 2018
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2020 Springer Nature Switzerland AG
About this paper
Cite this paper
Dizon, D.R., Ariola, M.S., Dela Vega, V.C., Sedilla, K. (2020). An Ergonomic Assessment of Transmission, Layout, and Content of Philippine Fast-Food Chains’ Customer Feedback Surveys for Effective Data Collection. In: Ahram, T., Falcão, C. (eds) Advances in Usability and User Experience. AHFE 2019. Advances in Intelligent Systems and Computing, vol 972. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-19135-1_58
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-19135-1_58
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-030-19134-4
Online ISBN: 978-3-030-19135-1
eBook Packages: EngineeringEngineering (R0)