Exit questionnaire

the Search Self-Efficacy scale (Brennan et al., 2016) and three subscales of the Active Procrastination scale (Choi & Moran, 2009). Participants completed the exit questionnaire after the semi-structured interview. The text of exit questionnaire items are shown in Table 4.12 and 4.13. Each of these are discussed below.

Realism checks. The post-experiment questionnaire contained two realism check statements to ascertain the realism of the scenario and recommendation tasks as shown in Table 4.12. These statements asked whether the participants could imagine themselves in the scenario and could imagine themselves making recommendations as in Dabholkar (1994). An additional ad-hoc, open-ended question asked participants to describe any recommendations that were not realistic. Participants were also asked to describe whether they had enough time to complete the tasks in an open-ended question as in Cheng (2003). A third question asked participants to describe any studies in which they had participated that were similar to this study.

Individual difference: Sensitivity to time pressure. The exit questionnaire also contained items to measure participants’ propensity for active procrastination, i.e., their “affective preference for time pressure,

Table 4.12: Exit Questionnaire. Questions with open-ended responses indicated in italics. For other questions, participants indicated agreement with statements on a 1-7 scale where 1=strongly disagree and 7=strongly agree.

Name Question text Source

Experiment Checks

Scenario realism I can imagine myself in the scenario (making recommendations for a friend). p

Topic realism I can imagine myself making recommendations like this ones in this study. p

Were there any recommendations that you could not imagine making in your real life? If so, please describe.

Time adequacy Did you have enough time to complete the tasks in this study? Please describe. i

Similar studies Is this study similar to others in which you have participated? If yes, please describe. a

3_{Source of questionnaire items: (a) ad-hoc, (i) adapted from Cheng (2003), (p) Dabholkar (1994)}

cognitive decision to procrastinate, behavioral capacity to meet deadlines, and ability to achieve satisfactory outcomes” (Choi & Moran, 2009, p. 197) as shown in of Table 4.13. Three subscales of the Active Procrastination Scale were used in this study: preference for pressure, outcome satisfaction, and ability to meet deadlines. The Preference for Pressure subscale measures the extent to which a person is challenged and motivated by time pressure rather than stressed by it. The Outcome Satisfaction scale measures the extent to which a person is able to obtain satisfactory task outcomes even when they complete a task under time pressure due to procrastination. Finally, the Ability to Meet Deadlines subscale measures the extent to which a person is able to use strategies to be able to complete their task on time even when they actively procrastinate. The fourth subscale, intentional decision, was excluded from the study as it measures the extent to which people intentionally procrastinate. The naming of these constructs was modified to reflect the reverse coding: preference for (no) pressure, outcome (dis)satisfaction, and (in)ability to meet deadlines. As noted in Section 4.9.3, after exploratory factor analysis, two composite variables were created out of these 12 items.

Individual difference: Search self-efficacy. The post-experiment questionnaire also contained items about the participant’s search self-efficacy as shown in the bottom of Table 4.13. To assess the participants’ self-efficacy with web search, a subset of the Search Self-Efficacy scale was used (Brennan et al., 2016; D. Kelly, 2010). Six items were included to capture participants’ self-efficacy in the search process with a focus on creating queries, evaluating the search results list, and finding adequate information. The full instrument contains 14 questions relating to one’s confidence in their ability to complete search tasks. Brennan et al. (2016) found four moderate to highly correlated factors in their exploratory factor analysis of data from

Table 4.13: Exit Questionnaire. Questions with open-ended responses indicated in italics. For other questions, participants indicated agreement with statements on a 1-7 scale where 1=strongly disagree and 7=strongly agree.

Name Question text Source2 Composite3

Active Procrastination Scaleoriginal three sub-scales

Preference for (no) pressuresubscale

deadline pain It is really a pain for me to work under upcoming deadlines. q procrast

upset I’m upset and reluctant to act when I’m forced to work under pressure. q pressure

tense I feel tense and cannot concentrate when there’s too much time pressure on me. q pressure

frustrated I’m frustrated when I have to rush to meet deadlines. q pressure

Outcome (dis)satisfactionsubscale

perf. suffers My performance tends to suffer when I have to race against deadlines. q pressure

don’t do well I don’t do well if I have to rush through a task. q pressure

not satisfied If I put things off to the last moment, I’m not satisfied with their outcomes. q pressure

better if slower I achieve better results if I complete a task at a slower pace, well ahead of a

deadline.

q pressure

(In)ability to meet deadlinessubscale

start last minute I often start things at the last minute and find it difficult to complete them on

time.

q procrast

fail to meet goals I often fail to accomplish goals I set for myself. q procrast

run late I’m often running late when getting things done. q procrast

diff. finish I have difficulty finishing activities once I start them. q procrast

1_{items taken from 3 of 4 scales in the original AP scale were included in this study; they are organized by the composite}

variables created for this study rather than the original constructs.

2_{Source of questionnaire items: (c) Brennan et al. (2016), (q) Choi and Moran (2009)}

3_{Composite variable after factor analysis. procrast = tendency to procrastinate and miss deadlines. pressure = sensitivity to}

negative impact of pressure

eight studies which used the full instrument among different populations (crowdworkers, university students, and the general public). In D. Kelly (2010), one component was identified. To create a more parsimonious questionnaire, a subset of the items were selected.

Demographic questions. At the end of the questionnaire, participants were asked their age, their highest level of education completed, and frequency of online searches. They were also asked to identify their affiliation(s) with the University: undergraduate student, graduate or professional student, staff, faculty, other, or none. If the participant selected a student status, they were asked for the degree they were pursuing (and major). Faculty and staff were asked their occupation and primary department. Participants were able to select multiple statuses and affiliations.

4.7.5 Decision and search behaviors. Behavioral measures were calculated based on the participants’