Question

Balance of questions makes logical sense but does not always have a strong impact on the results. Its impact is increased by the strength of a counterargument. The following two comparisons were drawn in one study reported by Schuman and Presser (1996):

A1: If there is a serious fuel shortage this winter, do you think there should be a law requiring people to lower the heat in their homes?

B1: If there is a serious fuel shortage this winter, do you think there should be a law requiring people to lower the heat in their homes, or do you oppose such a law?

Another study in a later year compared these forms:

A2: If there is a serious fuel shortage this winter, do you think there should be a law requiring people to lower the heat in their homes, or do you oppose such a law? (Same as B1 form).

B2: If there is a serious fuel shortage this winter, do you think there should be a law requiring people to lower the heat in their homes, or do you oppose such a law because it would be too difficult to enforce?

Within each pair of questions, which one do you think received the lower percentage of responses favoring the law? Explain your reasoning.

Answer 1

Answer:

• For the first Here with the principle course of action of request apparently the subsequent request would get cut down paces of responses supporting the law considering the way that the essential request gives an inexorably open completed response.

• Now with the second course of action of requests apparently the essential request would get cut down paces of responses supporting the law because the subsequent request offers inspiration to limit the law and the first is just a straight yes or no.