580 BOOK REVIEWS

A. ANGLEITNEK Einfihrung in die Personlichkeitspsychologie, Band 1. Nichtfaktorielle Ansiitze. Verlag Hans Huber. Bern, Suisse (1980). 338 pp. Fr 28/DM 31.

This is the first of a two-volume textbook of personality psychology, dealing with non-factorial approaches, while the second one will deal with the factorial methods as applied to personality theory and measurement. The book covers a broad field, including trait psychology, psychodynamic approaches, phenomenological models, situationism and interactionism. These various approaches are well-presented, clearly defined, and there are short but cutting and sometimes abrasive comments on various authors, such as Mischel, who usually deserve the criticism handed out. Altogether I found this introduction very sensible, reasonably complete and more informative than most such books. I was delighted to see how Angleitner dealt with the theories of Freud, Jung and Adler-pointing out that because they had not yet been subjected to empirical attempts at proof, because they were reasonably well known by most people, and had been broadly treated by other people, he would not deal with them at all! One can only wish that English-speaking introductions to the psychology of personality had the courage to follow his example.

H. J. EYSENCK

SEYMOUR SUDMAN and NORMAN M. BRADBURN: Asking Questions: A Practical Guide to Questionnaire Design. Jossey-Bass, San Francisco, Calif. (1982). xvi + 397 pp. f 14.95.

Designing questionnaires is an art, and Sudman and Bradbum are masters of this art. This book can be read on several levels. The experienced social researcher can use it as a checklist while designing instruments or as a rapid review of the technique. The cross-referencing is very helpful, and the treatment is sufficiently detailed that even ‘old hands’ will learn something from it. For researchers in other fields and for graduate and undergraduate students, the book is a thorough introductory textbook on questionnaire design. Asking Questions is a refreshing contrast to the typical textbook on methods of social research. Sudman and Bradbum have replaced mystification and preachment with helpful, precise suggestions. The basic concepts are explained along the way. The authors succeed in conveying their sense of the psychological interactions that underlie interviews and questionnaires. In addition, the text has a wealth of examples of questions drawn from actual surveys.

The book has some drawbacks for readers of this journal. Most of the treatment is based on interviewer-administered questionnaires, the type used by Gallup, NORC and other professional polling organizations. Although much of their advice is applicable to the self-administered questionnaires most often used by researchers in personality and individual differences, the relative neglect of these less costly and very widely used methods is unfortunate. Many personality researchers seem to assume that their low-budget efforts are somehow inferior to the work of the professional pollers, but on this point Sudman and Bradbum make some very interesting observations:

“With a few exceptions, no differences are observed in the answers given to the same questions asked by mail, phone, or face to face. Thus, other criteria-including sample biases, ability to ask the required questions, and costs-should usually determine the method of administration.” (p. 263)

“We have sometimes observed that inexperienced researchers tend to select face-to-face interviewing as always superior to alternative methods, particularly when the questionnaire deals with a threatening topic. The results of this chapter should alert researchers that alternative collection procedures may often be as good as, and sometimes better than, face-to-face interviewing.” (p. 279)

In light of these admissions, personality researchers should expect a more extensive and direct treatment of their specific problems with social questionnaires. Contemporary longitudinal researchers (most notably Philip Converse and the Bachman/O’Malley and Costa/McCrae groups) have begun the theoretical integration of mediating variables, such as personality traits and liberalism-Conservatism, with specific opinions and states of mind. This development will move American social researchers into theoreticai regions explored cross-sectionally by Eysenck and Wilson and their coworkers. There are many methodological issues and theoretical problems in this intersection. Classic psychometric texts give guidance in the construction of personality instruments and survey researchers expound the intricacies of the structured interview. In future, researchers will need to be conversant with both methodologies and textbooks will have to address the intersection of the two fields.

J. J. CONLEY