Literature Review Creation of a valid and reliable questionnaire is a very important step towards ensuring the research

Literature Review

Creation of a valid and reliable questionnaire is a very important step towards ensuring the research results are meaningful and generalized. To calibrate and test the satisfactoriness of the survey questions offered, one will have to resort to the existing scholarly literature dedicated to the questionnaire design, item generation, reliability, validity testing, and cultural appropriateness. The last five years of research have also pointed out the best practices in questionnaire development that can be used to complete the refinement of items in the current study.

One of the original themes highlighted in the literature is how it is very important to define constructs clearly prior to formulating questions. According to Ranganathan (2023), a good instrument always starts with a theoretical background that defines what the questionnaire will be measuring; be it attitudes, behavior or perception. Boateng et al. (2018) are also somewhat earlier but equally popular and also offer a framework according to which item generation can be viewed as an organized, multi-stage process starting with the identification of the construct. Without this understanding, the items can end up being undefined or off-topic or irrelevant to the main topic of the study. Indicatively, in the current questionnaire, questions concerning the cause of violence (media influence, poverty and mental illness) should be operationally defined so that respondents have a uniform interpretation of the questions.

After the definition of constructs, the second step is item generation and review. A number of studies emphasise on the use of expert panels in the process of checking questions on content validity. Lopez-Belmonte et al. (2022) indicated that the panels of specialists are worth using to ensure that the questionnaire items would represent the target domain sufficiently. Expert consensus with pre-pilot test strengthening before pilot testing was applied when they studied educational assessment in virtual settings. In a similar fashion, Tellez-Lopez et al. (2022) utilized the Delphi method to streamline items by multiple respondent groups, and in this way, the iterative nature of the used experts allowed to remove ambiguity and make sure that items are clear and culturally adequate. These results imply that the existing questionnaire is to be reviewed by experts, especially in the domains where the sensitive construct like race, political positions, or religion has to be considered because it can be construed in different ways by various populations.

The other theme in the literature is the role of pilot testing and pretesting. As Ranganathan (2024) points out, pilot studies can additionally determine the confusing items, as well as give initial information to be statistically confirmed. In their international survey study, Carlton et al. (2022) likewise emphasize the importance of face validation and pretesting when identifying words that are ambiguous or culturally specific and may undermine data quality. The most effective approach in uncovering concealed biases or misunderstandings has been found to be cognitive interviewing where the respondent explains what they have understood about every question (Koo & Yang, 2025). When applied to the current instrument, pretesting might show that such terms as violent history or American slavery are interpretered in a similar manner, or there might be a need to elaborate further.

Another trend that has been highly endorsed in the literature is the statistical validation of questionnaires. As described by Krieglstein et al. (2023), one of the models is offered by the authors who show how both the exploratory and confirmatory methods of factor analysis can confirm that items load on the constructs of which they were created to be relevant. The results of their study validate the need to assess the construct validity beyond face or content analysis. In the case of the survey under analysis, where the Likert-scale questions about the possible causes of violence are included, the factor analysis may help to verify the presence of clusters of items in particular categories (e.g. structural causes, cultural influences, psychological factors). Measures of reliability like the Cronbach alpha would also be used to measure the consistency of items in a category that would be a representation of the same underlying construct.

Response format and design is also an issue that has been discussed in the recent scholarship. Kmetty (2022) illustrates that the characteristics of the design of questionnaires, including the presence or absence of a don't know option, a check all that apply format, or the sequence of the questions, have a direct impact on the response rate and accuracy. Against this backdrop, the current questionnaire must be keen on whether to incorporate non-response or neutral response since compelling someone to agree or disagree could be subjective. The given Likert-scale format is already in accordance with the suggestions within the literature, but the order of items needs to be reconsidered to exclude primacy effects and respondent fatigue.

Another significant theme is associated with cross-cultural and contextual validity. According to Koo and Yang (2025), the respondents should be adapted to the sociocultural background of the items to prevent bias, and wrong interpretation. The applicability of consensus procedures, including fuzzy Delphi methods, is also proven by Montes et al. (2024) when it comes to the concept of determining culturally sensitive content validity. In the case of the present questionnaire, the responses to the constructs related to American historical (e.g., slavery) or cultural (e.g., media influence) issues will need to be worded in a manner that will avoid causing disconnect or isolating the respondents in the demographic variables.

Combined, the literature gives a clear guide on how to fine-tune and give the current questionnaire. First, items should be mapped to constructs, which should be well defined. Second, the content validity must be determined by means of expert evaluation and perhaps also Delphi consensus. Third, an ambiguous or biased wording should be identified by pilot testing and cognitive interviewing. Fourth, exploratory factor analysis and Cronbach alpha, statistical validation methods, must be used to pilot data to ascertain construct validity and reliability. Lastly, it should focus on sequence of questions, manner of responses and cultural adjustment to get maximum benefit of the responses.

Finally, an alternative viewpoint of questionnaire refinement and validation appears to prioritize a system in which the procedure is executed in several steps, which is highly endorsed by modern scholarship. With the combination of the input of experts, pilot testing, statistical validation, and considerations in the design, researchers might be able to make sure that their instruments are reliable and valid. Including such practices in the current survey on the cultural background of violence in the United States will result in increased validity of the research and make sure that the conclusions made with respect to the data is backed by a solid research methodology.

References

Boateng, G. O., Martin, S. L., Collins, S. M., Natamba, B. K., & Young, S. L. (2018). Best practices for developing and validating scales for health, social, and behavioral research: A primer. Frontiers in Public Health, 6, 149. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpubh.2018.00149

Carlton, J., Mukuria, C., Connell, J., Essat, M., Buck, E. T., Howarth, E., ... & Brazier, J. (2022). Generation, selection, and face validation of items for a large international questionnaire: PROMIS® preference score (PROPr). Value in Health, 25(2), 185–193. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jval.2021.09.001

Kmetty, Z. (2022). Assessing the effect of questionnaire design on unit and item nonresponse. Quality & Quantity, 56(2), 783–803. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11135-021-01185-1

Koo, M., & Yang, S. W. (2025). Questionnaire use and development in health research. Medicina, 61(2), 65. https://doi.org/10.3390/medicina6100065

Krieglstein, F., Beege, M., Rey, G. D., Sanchez-Stockhammer, C., & Schneider, S. (2023). Development and validation of a theory-based questionnaire to measure different types of cognitive load. Educational Psychology Review, 35(4), 10813–10842. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-023-09738-0

López-Belmonte, J., Segura-Robles, A., Fuentes-Cabrera, A., & Parra-González, M. E. (2022). Design and validation of a questionnaire for the evaluation of educational experiences and formative assessment in the metaverse. Heliyon, 8(10), e11184. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2022.e11184

Montes, R., Zuheros, C., Morales, J. M., Zermeño, N., Durán, J., Herrera, F., & Herrera-Viedma, E. (2024). Design and consensus content validity of the questionnaire for b-learning education: A 2-tuple fuzzy linguistic Delphi based decision support tool. Applied Soft Computing, 151, 110757. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asoc.2023.110757

Ranganathan, P. (2023). Designing and validating a research questionnaire: Part 1. Perspectives in Clinical Research, 14(2), 75–82. https://doi.org/10.4103/picr.picr_248_22

Ranganathan, P. (2024). Designing and validating a research questionnaire: Part 2. Perspectives in Clinical Research, 15(1), 31–38. https://doi.org/10.4103/picr.picr_23_24

Téllez-López, A. M., Márquez-Castro, B. Y., Bermúdez-Camps, I. B., Hernández, I. R., López-Orozco, M., & Gómez-Oliván, L. M. (2022). Design and validation of questionnaires to measure educational needs about medications in students, parents, and teachers in an elementary school in Hidalgo, Mexico. Journal of Pharmacy & Pharmacognosy Research, 10(6), 1058–1069. https://doi.org/10.56499/jppres22.1515_10.6.1058