DASS · SURVEY DESIGN & MEASUREMENT

Measurement Review Checklist

Use this checklist to organize a review before launching or revising a questionnaire. It helps identify evidence and unanswered questions; checking every box does not certify an instrument as valid.

1. Purpose and instrument

• □ State what each score is intended to mean and the decision it will support.
• □ Describe respondents, languages, setting, administration format, and consequences of error.
• □ Distinguish factual questions, individual feedback items, and multi-item scales.
• □ Record the instrument name, version, source, instructions, response options, recall period, and scoring.
• □ Confirm applicable use and modification conditions with the instrument documentation or owner.
• □ Review which populations, settings, and uses the available evidence actually covers.

2. Changes and understanding

• □ Log all wording, item, response-option, translation, format, and scoring changes.
• □ Review whether items cover the intended concept without introducing unrelated content.
• □ Include input from people familiar with the subject and intended respondents.
• □ Investigate how respondents interpret questions and choose answers.
• □ Document pilot findings, revisions, accessibility needs, and collection burden.

Prepared October 10, 2026 · A planning aid, not a standardized assessment or instrument-use permission.

DASS · REVIEW CONTINUED

3. Evidence, scoring, and comparisons

• □ Specify scoring, reverse coding, and missing-response rules before inspecting outcomes.
• □ Choose quantitative analyses appropriate to the score and use; do not default to factor analysis for every survey.
• □ Plan sample size and recruitment around model requirements, precision, and planned comparisons.
• □ Assess consistency or precision separately from evidence about score meaning.
• □ Examine relationships with other measures when relevant to the intended interpretation.
• □ Plan evidence for comparisons across groups, languages, sites, or time points.
• □ Avoid applying original cutoffs or norms to a revised version without supporting evidence.
• □ Keep instrument versions attached to records; do not silently combine scores across versions.
• □ Record remaining uncertainty, appropriate uses, and uses the evidence does not support.

A fictional review example

An invented training organization wants to shorten a published readiness scale and compare workshop cohorts. No client experience, instrument results, or recommended sample size is asserted.

Proposed use: identify participants who report needing more support. The score is not treated as a demonstration of competence or proof of workshop impact.

Open questions: Does removing items narrow the concept? Do participants interpret the revised questions as intended? Does the revised score support comparisons with earlier cohorts?

Next action: check documentation for a suitable short form, log changes, review content and understanding, and scope quantitative evidence. Keep versions separate until comparability is supported.

DASS · BLANK REVIEW WORKSHEET

4. Record your review

Sources: Standards for Educational and Psychological Testing; ITC adaptation guidance; CDC cognitive interviewing. Services: Book a DASS consultation.