{"?xml":{"@version":"1.0"},"edm:RDF":{"@xmlns:dc":"http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/","@xmlns:edm":"http://www.europeana.eu/schemas/edm/","@xmlns:wgs84_pos":"http://www.w3.org/2003/01/geo/wgs84_pos","@xmlns:foaf":"http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/","@xmlns:rdaGr2":"http://rdvocab.info/ElementsGr2","@xmlns:oai":"http://www.openarchives.org/OAI/2.0/","@xmlns:owl":"http://www.w3.org/2002/07/owl#","@xmlns:rdf":"http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#","@xmlns:ore":"http://www.openarchives.org/ore/terms/","@xmlns:skos":"http://www.w3.org/2004/02/skos/core#","@xmlns:dcterms":"http://purl.org/dc/terms/","edm:WebResource":[{"@rdf:about":"http://www.dlib.si/stream/URN:NBN:SI:doc-5I2ZIDQK/adbd146e-fff0-418d-8a26-e9eca9ed3ffa/HTML","dcterms:extent":"29 KB"},{"@rdf:about":"http://www.dlib.si/stream/URN:NBN:SI:doc-5I2ZIDQK/a4628c87-92ab-45e9-8338-5e7199cf5566/PDF","dcterms:extent":"924 KB"},{"@rdf:about":"http://www.dlib.si/stream/URN:NBN:SI:doc-5I2ZIDQK/98090ebf-2d42-4e5a-8831-b96999f13c20/TEXT","dcterms:extent":"27 KB"}],"edm:TimeSpan":{"@rdf:about":"1965-2025","edm:begin":{"@xml:lang":"en","#text":"1965"},"edm:end":{"@xml:lang":"en","#text":"2025"}},"edm:ProvidedCHO":{"@rdf:about":"URN:NBN:SI:doc-5I2ZIDQK","dcterms:isPartOf":[{"@rdf:resource":"https://www.dlib.si/details/URN:NBN:SI:spr-ETPSIC7M"},{"@xml:lang":"sl","#text":"Teorija in praksa"}],"dcterms:issued":"1998","dc:creator":"Uhan, Samo","dc:format":[{"@xml:lang":"sl","#text":"številka:2"},{"@xml:lang":"sl","#text":"letnik:35"},{"@xml:lang":"sl","#text":"str. 316-325"}],"dc:identifier":["ISSN:0040-3598","COBISSID:18419805","URN:URN:NBN:SI:doc-5I2ZIDQK"],"dc:language":"sl","dc:publisher":{"@xml:lang":"sl","#text":"Fakulteta za sociologijo, politične vede in novinarstvo v Ljubljani"},"dc:subject":[{"@xml:lang":"sl","#text":"anketiranje"},{"@xml:lang":"sl","#text":"družbena želenost"},{"@xml:lang":"sl","#text":"družboslovno raziskovanje"},{"@xml:lang":"sl","#text":"javno mnenje"},{"@xml:lang":"sl","#text":"metodologija"},{"@xml:lang":"sl","#text":"teorija"},{"@xml:lang":"en","#text":"theory"},{"@rdf:resource":"http://www.wikidata.org/entity/Q17737"}],"dcterms:temporal":{"@rdf:resource":"1965-2025"},"dc:title":{"@xml:lang":"sl","#text":"Družbena želenost in težnja k soglašanju v družboslovnem raziskovanju|"},"dc:description":[{"@xml:lang":"sl","#text":"Social survey researchers have realized for number of years that various response sets might have considerable influence on expressed opinions. Accordingly, we have to abandon the belief that the instrument is a neutral stimulus which provokes a reaction that has only to be recorded objectively. This holds all the more so when the topic is highly abstract and thus penetrates to the forefront of the respondent's psychic and symbolic structuralization. A phenomenon which is not exclusive to public opinion research is elucidated by Couch and Keniston (Kouch & Keniston 1964) in a study of 'the tendency to acquiesence'. The analysis of survey responses shows this tendency to be a personality variable, that is, a manifestation of the respondent's style and psychic structure. The authors find a high level of a priori congruity of responses irrespective of the content. On the other hand, social desirability is generaly considered to be a major source of response bias in survey research. Given the frequency with which them is mentioned as a cause, explanations of it are suprisingly rare in the literature. Generally speaking, it refers to a tendency to give favourable picture of onself (DeMaio 1985)"},{"@xml:lang":"sl","#text":"Povzetek. Novejši pristopi v metodologiji raziskovanja javnega mnenja polemizirajo z idejo o brezhibno obveščenem respondentu z jasnimi in prepoznavnimi preferencami. Rezultati empiričnih preverjanj kažejo, da respondenti niz modalitet (odgovorov) obravnavajo v polju t.i. omejene racionalnosti. To seveda ne pomeni, da respondenti izbirajo odgovore (modalitete) po naključju, temveč da poskušajo zmanjšati kognitivni napor na način poenostavitve procesov odločanja. Pri tem si moramo postaviti vprašanje,kakšne so konsekvence te ugotovitve za teorijo anketiranja, kakor tudi vprašanje o vzrokih za nastanek značilnih učinkov odgovarjanja na anketna vprašanja. Teorija anketiranja loči dva pomembna niza učinkov odgovarjanja na anketna vprašanja: težnjo k strinjanju in težnjo k izražanju socialno želenih odgovorov. Čeprav metodološka literatura pogosto učinkov družbene želenosti odgovorov in težnje k soglašanju ne ločuje eksplicitno, je ločena obravnava obeh fenomenov, ki ju sicer vključujemo v niz kontekstualnih dejavnikov, smiselna. Odločitev za ločeno obravnavo utemeljujemo z vzroki, ki botrujejo nastanku učinkov težnje k soglašanju in družbene želenosti odgovorov. Če so vzroki za nastanek težnje k soglašanju fenotipske osebnostne značilnosti respondentov, pa vzroke za nastanek učinkov družbene želenosti iščemo tako v osebnostnih lastnostih respondentov kot v značilnostih anketnega intervjuja nasploh"}],"edm:type":"TEXT","dc:type":[{"@xml:lang":"sl","#text":"znanstveno časopisje"},{"@xml:lang":"en","#text":"journals"},{"@rdf:resource":"http://www.wikidata.org/entity/Q361785"}]},"ore:Aggregation":{"@rdf:about":"http://www.dlib.si/?URN=URN:NBN:SI:doc-5I2ZIDQK","edm:aggregatedCHO":{"@rdf:resource":"URN:NBN:SI:doc-5I2ZIDQK"},"edm:isShownBy":{"@rdf:resource":"http://www.dlib.si/stream/URN:NBN:SI:doc-5I2ZIDQK/a4628c87-92ab-45e9-8338-5e7199cf5566/PDF"},"edm:rights":{"@rdf:resource":"http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC/1.0/"},"edm:provider":"Slovenian National E-content Aggregator","edm:dataProvider":{"@xml:lang":"en","#text":"National and University Library of Slovenia"},"edm:object":{"@rdf:resource":"http://www.dlib.si/streamdb/URN:NBN:SI:doc-5I2ZIDQK/maxi/edm"},"edm:isShownAt":{"@rdf:resource":"http://www.dlib.si/details/URN:NBN:SI:doc-5I2ZIDQK"}}}}