Bad Questionnaire

The bad questionnaire has several flaws that are created into the document. The first thing I noticed is that there weren’t directions given to the respondent on how to fill out the questionnaire. The problem definition is not clearly defined so it’s impossible to accurately give out information. Next, I noticed with question # 2 that they used a category scale but only had 3 options of agree, disagree, and not sure. They should have expanding the response categories to provide the respondent with more flexibility in ranking. For instance, they could have said:
-I have enjoyed most of my college classes so far-
1. Never
2. Rarely
3. Sometimes
4. Often
5. Very Often
This would provide a more sensitive measure of the category scale to provide more relevant information.
Question #3 is a semantic differential attitude scale but it doesn’t give instructions for the respondent to follow. The questionnaire should have give details about how to answer the question or it will most likely be left blank.
I also noticed that the structure of the questionnaire wasn’t set up properly. It’s almost like there two different questionnaires put together dealing with college students and automobiles. The very first question if the respondent put “no” would not be able answer questions 2, 3, 7, and 8 involving college students. At the same time, if you didn’t own a car you wouldn’t be able to discuss what you didn’t like about your car. The questionnaire should have been more accurately put together on a specific subject relevance to avoid respondent confusion. On a side note, I would also try to re word question # 5 about what you dislike about your car. If you are reading over that question fast, you might accidently read what do you like about your car because that’s what happened to me when I first glanced over the questions!