Essentials of Marketing Research 6Th Edition Babin Solutions Manual Full Chapter PDF

Chapter Seven: Survey Research
Essentials of Marketing Research

6th Edition Babin
Full download at link:
Test bank: https://testbankpack.com/p/test-bank-for-

essentials-of-marketing-research-6th-edition-by-babin-
zikmund-isbn-1305263472-9781305263475/
Solution Manual: https://testbankpack.com/p/solution-

manual-for-essentials-of-marketing-research-6th-
edition-by-babin-zikmund-isbn-1305263472-
9781305263475/
Chapter 7
Survey Research
AT-A-GLANCE
I. Introduction
II. The Types of Information Gathered Using Surveys

A. Research suppliers and contractors
B. Advantages and disadvantages of survey research
III. Sources of Error in Surveys

A. Random versus systematic sampling error
1. Respondent error
a. Nonresponse error
b. Response bias
c. Types of response bias
i. Acquiescence bias
ii. Extremity bias
iii. Interviewer bias
© 2016 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be scanned, copied or duplicated, in whole or in
part, except for use as permitted in a license distributed with a certain product or service or otherwise on a
password-protected website for classroom use.
iv. Social desirability bias

d. Administrative error
B. What can be done to reduce survey error?
IV. Ways Marketing Researchers Conduct Survey Interviews

A. Interactive survey approaches
B. Noninteractive media
V. Conducting Personal Interviews

A. Advantages of personal interviews
1. Opportunity for feedback
2. Probing complex answers
3. Length of interview
4. Completeness of questionnaire
5. Props and visual aids
6. High participation rate
B. Disadvantages of personal interviews
1. Interviewer influence
2. Lack of anonymity of respondent
3. Cost
C. Mall intercepts
D. Door-to-door interviews
E. Callbacks
F. Global considerations
G. Telephone interviews
1. Landline phones
a. No call legislation
b. Ownership
2. Mobile phones
H. Phone interview characteristics
1. Random digit dialing
2. Landline versus mobile phone results
3. Speed
4. Cost
5. Absence of face-to-face contact
6. Cooperation
7. Incentives to respond
8. Lack of visual medium
I. Central location interviewing
J. Global considerations
VI. Surveys Using Self-Administered Questionnaires

A. Mail questionnaires
3. Geographic flexibility
4. Cost
5. Respondent convenience
6. Respondent anonymity
7. Absence of interviewer
8. Standardized questions
9. Time is money
10. Length of mail questionnaire
B. Response rates
C. Increasing response rates for mail surveys
1. Cover letter
2. Incentives help
3. Advance notification
4. Survey sponsorship
5. Keying mail questionnaires with codes
D. Self-administered questionnaires using other forms of distribution
E. E-mail surveys
1. Using e-mail
2. Sampling and e-mail
3. Advantages and disadvantages of -email
F. Internet surveys
1. Speed and cost effectiveness
2. Visual appeal and interactivity
3. Respondent participation and cooperation
4. Accurate real-time data capture
5. Callbacks
6. Personalized and flexible questioning
7. Respondent anonymity
8. Improving response rates
9. Response quality
G. Text-message surveys
H. Choosing an appropriate survey approach
VII. Pretesting Survey Instruments
VIII. Ethical Issues in Survey Research
LEARNING OUTCOMES
1. Define surveys and describe the type of information that may be gathered in a survey.
2. Identify sources of error in survey research.
3. Summarize the ways researchers gather information through personal interviews.
4. Know the advantages and disadvantages of conducting surveys using personal interviews,
telephone calls, smartphone, tablet or PC.
5. Appreciate the importance of pretesting questionnaires.
6. Describe ethical issues that arise in survey research.
CHAPTER VIGNETTE: Mobile Surveys Catching On, and Catching

Respondents “On the Go”!
Researchers today are taking advantage of smartphone technologies that provide several ways to
capture consumer opinions. While phone calls to conduct surveys via voice communication are
possible in some instances, researchers know that they do not have to talk to consumers to be able
to communicate with them via a smartphone, tablet or phablet. Consumers of all ages use text
messaging as a way of communicating efficiently. Mobile surveying technologies integrate SMS
(short message service) survey capability into their products. Recipients of a mobile survey can
receive an SMS text message, in which they can answer single or multiple-choice questions, or
even provide open-ended responses to questions anytime or anywhere. The use of these types of
“instant feedback” survey responses can have many different business applications. Mobile
surveying is an exciting new way to capture data on respondents, no matter where they are.
Texting is routine now—perhaps the next time you see someone furiously texting on their cell
phone, they are responding to a mobile survey “on the go”!
SURVEY THIS!
How would you classify the survey you participated in as part of this class? Which approach did
it use? What media type was involved? What do you think the response rate for this survey is?
Students are instructed to e-mail the survey link to 10 friends and to tell them that it is a survey
about everyday things. Find out how many actually responded, and determine the click rate and
response rate. What other survey media could be used to effectively collect this specific
information?
RESEARCH SNAPSHOTS
➢ Show Us Some Love
Sometimes a service employee will ask a customer to respond to a post-service survey, and
the employee will ask the customer for a high rating. This may lead to the customer marking
a lower rating, even though that lower rating does not accurately reflect the customer’s true
feelings on the service received. If the goal of the company is truly to represent their
customer’s perceptions, have they introduced any sources of error illustrated in Exhibit 7.1
into the process?
➢ Getting Sleepy, Sleepy, Sleepy

Insomniacs do not respond to survey questions in the same way as non-insomniacs. In fact,
insomniacs produce greater response error particularly in the form of unconscious
misrepresentation due to a difficulty in paying attention due to sleep deprivation. This can
lead to acquiescence bias associated with low involvement. While it’s clear that insomniacs
increase error overall, they do seem to give fewer deliberate falsifications, such as those that
lead to social desirability bias. In other words, they are more likely to give their actual
occupation compared to well-rested respondents who display a tendency to make their jobs
seem more important and prestigious than they really are when answering a survey.
➢ What a Disaster
Marketing research among disaster victims can be extremely helpful in informing companies
and public institutions such as FEMA on the most urgent needs of disaster victims. If the
population that one wishes to represent is disaster victims, the sampling frame will also make
up disaster victims. This changes the way the research is approached. After a disaster, the
researcher cannot expect that the victim will have access to the Internet, smartphone, or land-
line telephone. In these cases, a personal interview sometimes is the only choice. If a problem
solver is trying to identify steps that can best provide aid to disaster victims, ignoring the
personal interview could be a major obstacle.
➢ Moving Around
Internet surveys can have technical issues that a marketing researcher may not realize. For
example, one researcher received a furious message from a frustrated participant who had
tried and failed to complete the survey due to an oversight in the programming code used to
write the survey instrument. When the user made a mistake when specifying a state of
residence, the interface recorded the user’s IP address, and then locked them out of the
survey. Often, this is a security feature of the survey, so that respondents can only fill out the
survey once. When a mistake is made, the participant may be unable to complete the survey
at all.
TIPS OF THE TRADE

➢ Even a perfectly written survey will produce erroneous results when the sample is
incapable of adequately representing a population due to survey error
➢ The longer the questionnaire, the lower the response rate. Anything longer than 10
minutes will get very low response rates unless special steps are taken, such as:
▪ Look for respondents who are essentially a captive audience; like students in a
class or people waiting for a plane
▪ Use a survey research panel
▪ Try to target the survey toward individuals who are highly involved in the
topic
▪ Offer a nontrivial incentive to respond
➢ Telephone surveys can still produce high-quality results. However, consider
supplementing with a mixed-mode approach that involves a combination of landline
calls, cell calls, and Internet surveys
▪ In the United States, cell calls cannot be automated unless a potential
respondent has opted in
➢ E-mail surveys and Internet surveys are good approaches for most types of surveys
given an adequate sampling frame like those that come from professionally managed
panels
▪ Any pretest is better than no pretest
OUTLINE
I. INTRODUCTION
A. Respondents are the people who answer questions during a survey.
B. Surveys provide a snapshot at a given point in time.
C. A sample survey is a more formal term for a survey emphasizing that respondents’
opinions presumably represent a sample of the larger target population’s opinion.
II. THE TYPES OF INFORMATION GATHERED USING SURVEYS

A. Questions about product use, desirable features and web habits help with product
development and advertising messages.
B. Surveys gather information to assess consumer knowledge and awareness of
products, brands, or issues and to measure consumer attitudes, feelings and
behaviors.
C. Certain aspects of surveys may be qualitative.
D. Advantages And Disadvantages of Survey Research
1. Advantages
a. Quick
b. Inexpensive
c. Efficient
d. Accurate
e. Flexible
2. Disadvantages
a. Can have errors, which cause misleading results
III. SOURCES OF ERROR IN SURVEYS

A. Random versus Systematic Sampling Error
1. Sampling error – error arising because of inadequacies of the actual respondents
to represent the population of interest
2. Systematic error – error resulting from some imperfect aspect of the research
design that causes respondent error or from a mistake in the execution of the
research
3. Population parameter – refers to some true value of a phenomenon within a
population
4. Sample bias – a persistent tendency for the results of a sample to deviate in one
direction from the true value of the population parameter
5. Respondent Error
a. A category of sample bias resulting from some respondent action such as
lying or inaction such as not responding
b. Nonresponse Error
i. Nonrespondents – sample members who are mistakenly not contacted
or who refuse to provide input in the research
ii. Nonresponse error – the statistical differences between a survey that
includes only those who responded and a perfect survey that would also
include those who failed to respond
iii. No contacts – potential respondents in the sense that they are members
of the sampling frame but who do not receive the request to participate in
the research
iv. Refusals – people who are unwilling to participate in a research project
v. Self-selection bias – a bias that occurs because people who feel strongly
about a subject are more likely to respond to survey questions than
people who feel indifferent about it
c. Response bias – a bias that occurs when respondents either consciously or
unconsciously answer questions with a certain slant that misrepresents the
truth
i. Deliberate falsification
ii. Unconscious misrepresentation
d. Types of Response Bias
i. Acquiescence bias – tendency for a respondent to maintain a consistent
response style often tending to try to go along and agree with the
viewpoint of a survey
ii. Extremity bias – a category of response bias that results because some
individuals tend to use extremes when responding to questions
iii. Interviewer bias – a response bias that occurs because the presence of
the interviewer influences respondents’ answers
iv. Social desirability bias – bias in responses caused by respondents’
desire, either conscious or unconscious, to gain prestige or appear in a
different social role
6. Administrative error – an error caused by the improper administration or
execution of the research task
a. Data processing error – a category of administrative error that occurs
because of incorrect data entry, incorrect computer programming, or other
procedural errors during data analysis
b. Sample selection error – an administrative error caused by improper sample
design or sampling procedure execution
c. Interviewer error – mistakes made by interviewers failing to record survey
responses correctly
d. Interviewer cheating – the practice of filling in fake answers or falsifying
questionnaires while working as an interviewer
B. What Can Be Done to Reduce Survey Error?
IV. WAYS MARKETING RESEARCHERS CONDUCT SURVEY INTERVIEWS

A. Interactive Survey Approaches
1. Communication that allows spontaneous two-way interaction between the
interviewer and the respondent
B. Noninteractive Media
1. Two-way communication by which respondents give answers to static questions
that do not allow a dynamic dialog
V. CONDUCTING PERSONAL INTERVIEWS

A. Personal interview – interactive face-to-face communication in which an
interviewer asks a respondent to answer questions
B. Advantages of Personal Interviews
1. Opportunity for Feedback
2. Probing Complex Answers
3. Length of Interview
4. Completeness of Questionnaire
a. Item nonresponse – failure of a respondent to provide an answer to a survey
question
5. Props and Visual Aids
6. High Participation Rate
C. Disadvantages of Personal Interviews
1. Interviewer Influence
2. Lack of anonymity of respondent
3. Cost
D. Mall Intercepts
1. Personal interviews conducted in a shopping center or similar public area
2. Door-to-Door Interviews
a. Personal interviews conducted at respondents’ doorsteps in an effort to
increase the participation rate in the survey
3. Callbacks
a. Attempts to try and contact those sample members missed in the initial
attempt
b. CATI – acronym for computer-assisted telephone interviews where a
computer routine automatically selects numbers from a sampling frame,
schedules calls and callbacks
E. Global Considerations
1. Marketing researchers recognize that the manner of conducting and the
receptiveness to personal interview varies dramatically around the world.
2. Telephone interviews
a. Landline phones
i. No-Call legislation
(a) Marketers cannot call phone numbers listed on the do-not-call
registry.
(b) Robocalls – a phone call conducted by an autodialer and using
recorded voice message system
ii. Ownership
(a) Coverage bias – misrepresentation of a population by survey results
that disproportionately represent one group over another
b. Mobile Phones
i. In the United States, telemarketing toward mobile phone numbers is
prohibited unless the user opts in.
ii. The area codes for mobile phones are not necessarily geographic. For
instance, a person who moves from Georgia to Washington can choose to
keep the old phone number. As a result, a researcher conducting a voice
call survey may be unable to determine whether a respondent fits into the
desired geographic sampling population.
iii. The phones have varying abilities for automated responses and differing
keypads. Some requests, such as “hit pound sign,” may be more difficult
to do on some keypads than on others.
F. Phone Interview Characteristics
1. Random Digit Dialing
a. Use of telephone exchanges and random numbers to develop a sample of
respondents in a landline phone survey
2. Landline versus Mobile Phone Results
a. Mobile phones are less like to be shared
b. Calls to mobile phone numbers are more likely to be answered
c. Calls to mobile phones are less likely to be answered on weekends
d. Refusals are higher in calls to mobile phones
e. Calls to respondents of mobile phones should be duly compensated and calls
should be kept shorter
f. Mobile phone users are different demographically
g. Mobile phone users own different types of durable goods
3. Speed
4. Cost
5. Absence of Face-to-Face Contact
6. Cooperation
7. Incentives to Respond
8. Lack of Visual Medium
G. Central Location Interviewing
1. Telephone interviews conducted from a central location, allowing firms to hire a
staff of professional interviewers and to supervise and control the quality of
interviewing more effectively
H. Global Considerations
1. Different cultures often have different norms about proper telephone behavior.
VI. SURVEYS USING SELF-ADMINISTERED QUESTIONNAIRES

A. Self-Administered Questionnaires
1. Surveys in which the respondent takes the responsibility for reading and
answering the questions without having them stated orally by an interviewer
B. Mail Questionnaires
1. Mail survey – a self-administered questionnaire sent to respondents through the
mail
a. Geographic Flexibility
b. Cost
c. Respondent Convenience
d. Respondent Anonymity
e. Absence of Interviewer
f. Standardized Questions
g. Time is Money
h. Length of Mail Questionnaire
C. Response Rates
1. Response rate – the number of questionnaires returned and completed divided
by the number of sample members provided a chance to participate in the survey
D. Increasing response Rates for Mail Surveys
1. Cover letter
a. Letter that accompanies a questionnaire to induce the reader to complete and
return the questionnaire
2. Incentives Help
3. Advance Notification
4. Survey Sponsorship
5. Keying Mail Questionnaires with Codes
E. Self-administered questionnaires using other forms of distribution
1. Drop-off method – a survey method that requires the interviewer to travel to the
respondent’s location to drop off questionnaires that will be picked up later
F. E-Mail Surveys
1. Survey requests distributed through electronic mail
2. Using E-Mail
a. Include in the body of an email
b. Include as attachment
c. Include a hyperlink to a web-based questionnaire
3. Sampling and E-mail
a. Most people can be sampled via e-mail.
4. Advantages and Disadvantages of E-mail
a. Advantages
i. Speed
ii. Lower costs
iii. Faster turnaround time
iv. More flexibility
v. Less manual processing
vi. Candid responses
b. Disadvantages
i. Sometimes can have lack of anonymity
ii. Spam filters
iii. Problems associated with successful delivery
G. Internet Surveys
1. A self-administered survey administered using a Web-based questionnaire
a. Speed and Cost Effectiveness
b. Visual Appeal and Interactivity
c. Respondent Participation and Cooperation
i. Crowdsourcing – inviting many, many people to participate in a project
via the Internet and/or social networks so that even a small percentage of
completers can generate a usable sample
d. Accurate Real-Time Data Capture
e. Callbacks
f. Personalized and Flexible Questioning
g. Respondent Anonymity
h. Improving Response Rates
i. Click through response rate – the portion of potential respondents
exposed to a hyperlink to a survey who actually click through to view the
questionnaire
i. Response Quality
H. Text-Message Surveys
1. Can only research respondents who have opted in with expressed consent.
I. Choosing an Appropriate Survey Approach
1. Questions to determine the appropriate technique:
a. Is the assistance of the interviewer necessary?
b. Are respondents interested in the issues being investigated?
c. Will cooperation be easily attained?
d. How quickly is the information needed?
e. Will the study require a long and complex questionnaire?
f. How large is the budget?
2. Mixed-mode survey – term used to refer to a survey approach that uses more
than one survey medium to reach potential respondents
VII. PRETESTING SURVEY INSTRUMENTS

A. Pretesting – screening procedure that involves a trial run with a group of respondents
to iron out fundamental problems in the survey design
VIII. ETHICAL ISSUES IN SURVEY RESEARCH

A. Participants’ right to privacy
B. The use of deception
C. Respondents’ rights to be informed about the purpose of the research
D. The need for confidentiality
E. The need for honesty in collecting data
F. The need for objectivity in collecting data
QUESTIONS FOR REVIEW AND CRITICAL THINKING/ANSWERS

1. What is a survey? Give an example of one that you’ve recently participated in. Find an
example of survey results reported in the Wall Street Journal.
A survey represents a way of describing public opinion by collecting primary data through
communicating directly with individual sampling units. Surveys provide a snapshot at a given
point in time. More precisely, this is a sample survey because the respondents’ opinions
presumably represent a sample of the larger target population’s opinion. For consumer-oriented
firms, sample surveys represent a primary tool for staying in touch with the population of
consumers. Student answers regarding a survey they have participated in and an example survey
for the Wall Street Journal will vary.
2. What is self-selection bias? Describe it as a source of total survey error.
Self-selection bias is a problem that frequently plagues self-administered questionnaires, such as

a satisfaction card left at the table at a restaurant. It distorts surveys because they overrepresent
extreme positions while underrepresenting responses from those who are indifferent.
3. Do surveys tend to gather qualitative or quantitative data? What types of information are
commonly measured with surveys?
A survey is defined as a method of collecting primary data based on communication with a

representative sample of individuals. Because most survey research is descriptive research, the
term survey is most often associated with quantitative findings, but some aspects of surveys may
also be qualitative. The type of information gathered in a survey varies considerably depending
on its objectives. Typically, surveys attempt to describe what is happening or to learn the
response for a particular marketing activity. Identifying characteristics of target markets,
measuring consumer attitudes, and describing consumer purchasing patterns are common survey
objectives. Questions about product use and desirable features help with product development
and advertising messages. Demographic information and information on media exposure might
also be collected in the survey to help plan a market segmentation strategy.
4. What potential sources of error listed in Exhibit 7.1 might be associated with the following
situations?
a. In an Internet survey of frequent fliers age 50 and older, researchers conclude that price
does not play a significant role in airline travel because only 25 percent of the
respondents check off price as the most important consideration in determining where
and how they travel, whereas 35 percent rate price as being unimportant. Management
decides prices can be increased with little loss in business.
There is a potential for response bias due to social desirability, which may be deliberate
falsification or unconscious misrepresentation. Furthermore, the frequent fliers, who are likely to
be business people who have someone else arrange for travel, may not know the importance of
price to the actual decision maker. Thus, potential administration error due to sample selection is
another likely source of error.
b. A telephone survey of big city voters finds that most respondents do not like negative
political ads—that is, advertising by one political candidate that criticizes or exposes
secrets about the opponent’s “dirty laundry.” Researchers conclude that negative
advertising should not be used.
There is a potential for an extremity bias, with some responding in the extreme to the researcher’s
question. The possibility of unconscious misrepresentation is also an issue. Constituents are
primed on a regular basis to have a negative opinion of negative political ads.
c. A survey accessed through Instagram produces results ranking Apple Macbooks as far
superior to other PCs for business applications. A retailer decides to reduce inventory of
PCs other than Macbooks.
This is most likely a sample selection error. Users of Instagram may not be representative of the
total PC market. Therefore, the retailer should be cautious in interpreting the results.
d. Researchers who must conduct a 45-minute personal interview offer $175 to each
respondent because they believe that people who will sell their opinions are more typical
than someone who will talk to a stranger for free for 45 minutes. Management uses the
results to adjust their services offering.
With the addition of such a large incentive for participation, respondents may fall into a social
desirability bias or an acquiescence bias, or both. The potential respondents may feel they have to
answer the questions based on what they think the interviewer is looking for, in order to earn the
money for their participation.
e. A company’s sales representatives are asked what percentage of the time they spend
traveling, talking on the telephone, participating in meetings, working on the computer, in
training and filling out reports for management. The survey is conducted via the
company’s email network. Management concludes that sales reps are not spending
enough time performing selling in the field.
A respondent in this typical situation will give an answer to questions about time spent in various
activities. However, it is very likely that the respondent has some memory problems and does not
know the exact percentages of time spent on each activity. Asked for an answer, in general, the
individual will tend to give a generalized answer, reflecting the ideal or expected behavior for
situations. This is an example of unconscious misrepresentation.
f. A health insurance company obtains a 75 percent response rate from a sample of college
students contacted by mobile phone in a study of attitudes toward life insurance. Survey
respondents received a code for a free meal from Canes. The company is concerned that
consumers are less interested in life insurance these days.
This could be the result of a sample selection error. College students only represent on portion of
the overall consumer market for life insurance, and because they are young, may not be as
concerned about life insurance as other demographic groups.
5. A sample of 14-year-old schoolchildren is asked if they have ever smoked a cigarette. The
students are asked to respond orally in the presence of other students. What types of error
might enter into this process?
A social desirability bias will most likely occur, but perhaps not in the direction one may first
assume. Children of this age know they should not smoke, so they may say they do not in the
presence of an adult interviewer. However, depending on the peer pressure a student may be
facing, he or she may reply “yes” when, in fact, they have never smoked to appear “cool” to the
other students. Either way, it is still a social desirability bias at play.
6. Why is response rate a concern for survey researchers? Are there other issues that should be
of greater concern?
Response rates have several important impacts on the validity of survey results. Response rates
that are too low may indicate a problem with the survey delivery or design; whereas response
rates that are too high may indicate that respondents are complying due to incentives that are
coercive. There are several other issues that can be of greater concern. For example, the many
sources of error in Exhibit 7.1 should all be taken into account, so that the researcher can
approximate the total error in the survey. Even if a response rate is 100%, the results will only be
valid if all other sources of error are accounted for.
7. [Ethics Question] A researcher sends out 2,000 questionnaires via e-mail and promises
respondents anonymity. Fifty surveys are returned because the e-mail addresses are
inaccurate. Of the 1,950 delivered questionnaires, 100 are completed and e-mailed back.
However, 40 of these respondents wrote that they did not want to participate in the survey.
The researcher indicates the response rate was 5.0 percent. Is this the right thing to do? What
concerns might you have about this approach?
The 5% (100/2000 = .05 or 5%) response rate figure is a bit deceptive. Though the chapter did
not cover how to report response rates, students should discuss whether not the 40 responses that
indicated that they did not want to participate should be included as “responses.” Furthermore,
should the 50 undelivered questionnaires be included in the number of questionnaires sent out?
8. Define interactive and noninteractive survey approaches. Why might a researcher choose an
interactive survey approach over a noninteractive survey approach?
Interactive survey approaches are those that allow spontaneous two-way interaction between the
interviewer and the respondent. These can be either personal or electronic, and they try to capture
the dynamic exchange that is possible through face-to-face interviews. Noninteractive survey
approaches are those that do not facilitate two-way communications and are thus largely a vehicle
by which respondents give answers to static questions. Noninteractive approaches can be the
approach in some situations, such as simple opinion polls, awareness studies and even surveys
assessing consumer attitudes.
9. Suppose a firm wanted to conduct an interactive survey to predict whether to push marketing
efforts aimed at families expecting their first child through Pinterest, Instagram or Facebook
efforts. The researcher is considering using a single-mode approach consisting of a telephone
survey. Critique this decision and offer suggestions for improvement.
More and more households no longer have landline telephone service, and there are several
stringent laws governing the use of marketing phone calls to cell phones, so the researcher’s
response rate may be limited in this design. Instead, an interactive survey approach could be
employed using the Internet. Or, if the funding for the research is available, face-to-face
interviews could be conducted.
10. A publisher offers teenage boys (aged 14–17 years old) one of four best-selling famous rock
posters as an incentive for filling out a ten-page mail questionnaire about what makes a good
guitar. What are the pros and cons of offering this incentive? Yes or no, should the incentive
be offered (explain)?
The major advantage of any incentive is to increase survey response rates. The incentive may
stimulate a high rate of return. However, because the incentive may be perceived very favorably
by this group of respondents, it is more than just a token of appreciation.
Some respondents may quickly provide superficial answers to the questionnaire just to receive
this substantial incentive. Needless to say, this may cause considerable problems in the data
analysis.
11. What do you think should be the maximum length of a self-administered e-mail questionnaire
using no financial incentive?
A general rule of thumb on both mail and e-mail surveys is that they should not take more than 12
minutes to complete.
12. A survey researcher reports that “205 usable questionnaires out of 942 questionnaires
delivered in our mail survey converts to a 21.7 percent response rate.” What are the subtle
implications of this statement?
The first thing a student should mention is that the terms “usable questionnaires” and “delivered
questionnaires” need to be clarified. A usable questionnaire may mean that the researcher
eliminated, for whatever reason, some questionnaires because they were incomplete, illegible,
falsified, etc. The term “delivered questionnaire” indicates that the response rate would be lower
than if the total number of questionnaires sent out were used to calculate response rate. Thus, it is
possible that some questionnaires were marked “return to sender” but the postal service statement
is not exactly clear about what this means.
13. What is do-not-call legislation? What effect has it had on survey research?
According to the do-not-call legislation, marketing researchers cannot solicit information via
phone numbers listed on the do-not-call registry. Thus, to the extent that consumers who place
their numbers on these lists share something in common, such as a greater desire for privacy, a
representative sample of the general population cannot be obtained. Marketers and marketing
researchers can obtain the do-not-call lists of phone numbers from the FTC for a fee, but it is
worth it because the FTC levies fines on the order of $10,000 per violation (per call).
14. Agree or disagree with this statement: Landline and mobile-phone surveys are essentially the
same and can be used in the same situations with the same results.
Mobile phone interviews differ from landline phones most obviously because they are directed
toward a mobile (i.e., cell) phone number. However, there are other less obvious distinctions:
• In the U.S., no telemarketing can be directed toward mobile phone numbers by law.
Respondents have to “opt-in” before their phone number would be made available for
such calls.
• The recipient of a mobile phone call is even more likely to be distracted than the recipient
of a home or office call.
• The area codes for mobile phones are not necessarily tied to geography, so a researcher
may be unable to determine whether or not a respondent fits into the desired geographic
sampling population simply by taking note of the areas code.
• The phones have varying abilities for automated responses and differing keypads.
Also, results from landline and mobile phones will differ due to the following reasons:
• Calls to mobile phone numbers are more likely to result in someone answering the phone
on weekdays during working hours.
• Calls to mobile phone numbers are less likely to result in someone answering the phone
on weekends.
Another random document with
no related content on Scribd:
Venetian merchant, proposes to stand security for a friend who
wants to borrow three thousand ducats of the Jew, on Antonio’s
bond. Even while negotiating the loan, the Christian reviles the Jew
as “an evil soul, a villain with a smiling cheek,” a whited sepulchre.
Shylock now reminds him of all the insults and invectives he used to
heap upon him in the Exchange:
“You call me misbeliever, cut-throat dog,

And spit upon my Jewish gaberdine,
and yet you solicit my help.” The Christian answers:
“I am as like to call thee so again,

To spit on thee again, to spurn thee too,”
and asks him to lend the money as to an enemy. The Jew pretends
to forgive and forget; but he takes Antonio at his word, and playfully
demands a forfeit “for an equal pound of your fair flesh, to be cut off
and taken in what part of your body pleaseth me.” The bond is
sealed, and it proves a fatal bond. Antonio’s ships are wrecked at
sea, and, when the term expires, he finds himself unable to pay the
Jew.
Shylock, like Barabas, has an only daughter, Jessica, whom he
cherishes and trusts above all human beings. All the love that he can
spare from his ducats is lavished upon this daughter. Fair as Abigail,
Jessica lacks the filial loyalty and sweet grace which render the
daughter of Barabas so charming a contrast to her father. Jessica is
“ashamed to be her father’s child.” She detests him, and to her her
own home “is hell.” Enamoured of a Christian youth, she enters into
a shameless intrigue with him to deceive and rob her father, and,
disguised as a boy, she runs away with her lover, carrying a quantity
of gold and jewels from the paternal hoard. The discovery of his
daughter’s desertion throws Shylock, as it did Barabas, into despair.
He never felt his nation’s curse until now.
While in this mood he hears of Antonio’s losses and rejoices
exceedingly thereat. The news of his enemy’s mishap acts as a
salve for his own domestic woes. His old grudge against the
Christian, embittered by his recent misfortune, steels him against
mercy. He recalls the indignities and injuries of which he had been
the recipient at Antonio’s hands, all because he was a Jew, and
vows to exact the full forfeit: to have the Christian’s flesh. Antonio is
taken to prison and implores Shylock for pity; but the latter grimly
answers: “I’ll have my bond. Thou call’dst me dog before thou hadst
a cause; but since I am a dog, beware my fangs. I will have my
bond.”
The Venetian law was strict on the subject of commercial
transactions. The prosperity of the Republic depended on its
reputation for equity and impartiality, and not even the Doge could
interfere with the course of Justice. The trial commences. Antonio
appears in court, and Shylock demands justice. He is not to be
softened by prayers from the victim’s friends, or by entreaties from
the Duke. He will not even accept the money multiplied three times
over; but he insists on the due and forfeit of his bond. Thus matters
stand, when Portia, the betrothed of Antonio’s friend, appears on the
scene in the guise of a young and learned judge. She first
endeavours to bend the Jew’s heart; but on finding him inflexible,
she acknowledges that there is no power in Venice that can alter a
legally established claim: “The bond is forfeit, and lawfully by this the
Jew may claim a pound of flesh.”
Antonio is bidden to lay bare his breast, and Shylock is gleefully
preparing to execute his cruel intent; the scene has reached its
climax of dramatic intensity, when the tables are suddenly turned
upon the Jew. The young judge stays his hand with these awful
words:
“This bond doth give thee here no jot of blood.

Take thou thy pound of flesh;
But, in the cutting it, if thou dost shed
One drop of Christian blood, thy lands and goods
Are, by the laws of Venice, confiscate
Unto the state of Venice.”
Shylock has scarcely recovered from this thunderclap, and

expressed his willingness to accept the money offered to him at first,
when the judge interrupts him: “The Jew shall have all justice—
nothing but the penalty”—just a pound of flesh, not a scruple more or
less. If not, “thou diest and all thy goods confiscate.”
Shylock is now content to accept only the principal. But the judge
again says: “Since the Jew refused the money in open Court, he
shall have merely justice and his bond—nothing but the forfeiture,”
under the conditions already named.
Shylock offers to give up his claim altogether. But no! the judge
again says:
“The law hath yet another hold on you.

It is enacted in the laws of Venice—
If it be proved against an alien
That by direct or indirect attempts
He seek the life of any citizen,
The party ’gainst the which he doth contrive
Shall seize one half his goods; the other half
Comes to the privy coffer of the State;
And the offender’s life lies in the mercy
Of the Duke only, ’gainst all other voice.
In which predicament, I say, thou stand’st.
Down, therefore, and beg mercy of the Duke.”
Antonio intercedes on behalf of his enemy, and allows him to

retain the use of one half of his goods, on condition that he become
a Christian and bequeath his property to his Christian son-in-law and
his daughter. The Jew perforce accepts these terms, leaves the
Court crestfallen, and every good man and woman is expected to
rejoice at his discomfiture.
Such is the Jew in Shakespeare’s eyes, or rather in the eyes of
the public which Shakespeare wished to entertain. Yet, despite the
poet’s anxiety to interpret the feelings of his audience, his own
humanity and sympathetic imagination reveal themselves in the
touching appeal put into the victim’s mouth: “Hath not a Jew eyes?
hath not a Jew hands, organs, dimensions, senses, affections,
passions? Fed with the same food, hurt with the same weapons,
subject to the same diseases, healed by the same means, warmed
and cooled by the same winter and summer, as a Christian? if you
prick us, do we not bleed? if you tickle us, do we not laugh? if you
poison us, do we not die? and, if you wrong us, shall we not
revenge? If we are like you in the rest, we will resemble you in that.”
But few, if any, of Shakespeare’s contemporaries shared his own
broad sense of justice. The Jew was popularly regarded as the
quintessence of all that is foul, grim, and greedy in human form. In
him the Elizabethan Englishman saw all the qualities that he
detested: covetousness, deceitfulness, and cruelty. Moreover, the
Jew was still identified with the typical usurer, and usury continued to
be regarded in England with all the superstitious horror of the Middle
Ages. It was not until the reign of Henry VIII. that a law
1546
was reluctantly passed, fixing the interest at 10 per
cent. But the prejudice against lending money for profit was so
strong that the law had to be repealed in the following reign. All loans
at interest were again pronounced illegal under Edward VI. by an Act
which defeated its own purpose, and was in its turn repealed during
the reign of Queen Elizabeth, when, despite the law, the rate of
interest was 14 per cent. A second Act, passed in 1571, while
violently condemning usury, in the modern sense of the term, permits
an interest of 10 per cent. This rate remained in force under James I.
Bacon has recorded for us the opinions and the sentiments of
his contemporaries on the subject. In his essay Of Seditions and
Troubles, written some time between 1607 and 1612, he says:
“Above all things, good Policie is to be used, that the Treasure and
Moneyes, in a State, be not gathered into few Hands. For otherwise,
a State may have a great Stock, and yet starve.... This is done,
chiefly, by suppressing, or at least, keeping a strait Hand, upon the
Devouring Trades of Usurie, etc.” In this passage Bacon objects to
usury on economic grounds. Elsewhere he sets forth objections of a
totally different nature. In the essay Of Riches, published in 1625, he
says: “Usury is the certainest Meanes of Gaine, though one of the
worst; As that, whereby a Man doth eate his Bread; In sudore vultûs
alieni; and besides, doth Plough upon Sundaies.” Aristotle’s
mischievous metaphor was still quoted as an argument against
usury. It is mentioned by Bacon among the many “witty invectives
129
against usury” current in his time, and it is embodied by
Shakespeare in the phrase that usurers “take a breed for barren
130
metal.”
At that time the question was engrossing public attention. In
1621 a Bill for the abatement of usury had been brought into
Parliament, and two years later a second Bill to the same effect
passed the Commons. Bacon seized the opportunity for the
publication of his essay Of Usurie, which appeared in 1623. In a
letter to Secretary Conway he states that his object in writing it was
to suggest means, whereby “to grind the teeth of usury and yet to
make it grind to his Majesty’s mill in good sort, without discontent or
perturbation.” In consonance with this view, Bacon describes usury
as an evil, indeed, but as an inevitable evil: “For since there must be
Borrowing and Lending, and Men are so hard of Heart, as they will
not lend freely, Usury must be permitted.” He proceeds to balance
the advantages and disadvantages of the practice and comes to the
conclusion that it should be recognised and controlled by the State,
for “It is better to mitigate Usury by Declaration, than to suffer it to
rage by Connivance.” Bacon’s advocacy was not wasted. In the
1624
following year Usury was once more sanctioned by the
Legislature and interest was reduced to 8 per cent. But
this measure did not obliterate the deep-seated hatred of the money-
lender, nor did it weaken the popular idea that usury was the peculiar
attribute of a Jew. Bacon in the same essay tells us that there were
among his contemporaries men who recommended “that Usurers
should have Orange-tawney Bonnets, because they doe Judaize.”
However, the abhorrence of the Jew was that which is inspired
by a repulsive abstraction rather than by a concrete individual. The
Jew in the flesh was practically an unknown creature to the ordinary
English man and woman of the age. If he was hated as a blood-
sucking ghoul, he was not more real than a ghoul. But scarcely had
the generation that hissed Barabas and Shylock on the stage passed
away, when the Jew reappeared as a human reality upon the soil
which his fathers had quitted more than three centuries before.
Meanwhile a great change had come over England. The protest
against authority, both in its intellectual and in its spiritual form, had
crossed the Channel and been welcomed by responsive souls on
our shores. When Erasmus came to England in 1498, he found here
more than he brought with him. Grocyn had learnt his Greek in Italy,
and Colet had returned from that country breathing scorn for the
“ungodly refinements” of theology. In these scholars, and scholars
like these, Erasmus found kindred spirits; hearty allies in the struggle
for light. Colet enchanted him with his Platonic eloquence, and Sir
Thomas More with the sweetness of his temper. And the band of
these three noble men—Colet, Erasmus and More—all eager for
reform and for purification of mind and soul, sowed the seed from
which was to spring a plant that even they little dreamed of. The
characteristic compromise between the new and the old under Henry
VIII., grew into the purer Protestantism of Elizabeth and James I.,
and, though in Shakespeare we still see a world essentially Catholic
in tone and ideas, it is a world that is fast dying away. Yet a few
years more and Protestantism, under its most militant and morose
aspect, has banished the last vestiges of mediaeval Catholicism and
merriment from Merry England. King Charles is gone, and Oliver
Cromwell has inherited the realities, if not the pomp, of royalty.
CHAPTER XVIII
RESETTLEMENT
There was much in Cromwell’s followers to dispose them favourably

towards Israel. Their history, their theology, their character, their
morals, and their ideals were all as Hebraic as anything could be that
had not had its birth in Asia. The Puritans boasted, as the Jews had
always done, that they themselves were the only pure Church, and
hated all others as idolaters. They believed, as the Jews had always
done, that they were the favourite people of Heaven, selected by the
Almighty to bear testimony to His unity, to fight His battles and to
exterminate His enemies: “Destroy the Amalekites, root and branch,
hip and thigh,” was the burden of the Puritan preachers. They
dreamed of a Theocracy, as the Jews had always done; of a state in
which the civil should be subordinated to religious authority. The
spiritual arrogance of the Jew met with its other half in the spiritual
arrogance of the Puritan. If the Jew held that for him Jehovah had
spoken on Mount Sinai, the Puritan was equally certain that for him
God had suffered on the hill of Calvary. If the Jew applied to himself
the prophecies of the Old Testament, the Puritan was as eager to
appropriate the fulfilments of the New. They both walked with their
heads in the skies, but with their feet firm upon solid earth. The daily
contemplation of eternal interests did not disqualify either of them for
the successful pursuit of temporal ends. Spiritual at once and
practical, they saw in material prosperity a proof of divine
approbation. Believing, as they did, that “thrift is blessing,” they
strove to earn the fruits of thrift by excessive piety. And, while they
established their own rule, they had no doubt that they were
promoting the Kingdom of God.
The resemblance can be traced to the minutest details. The
Puritan’s detestation of the fine arts, of ecclesiastical decoration, and
of sacerdotal foppery was not less sincere than that of the Jew.
Equally strong was the hatred entertained by both sects towards
public amusements. Under the reign of the Puritans the playhouses
were closed, masques were anathematised, maypoles demolished;
all beauty was denounced as a sin, all pleasure punished as a crime.
Even so at the same period (about 1660) a Rabbi of Venice
expressed his horror at the establishment of theatres by Venetian
Jews, wherein men, women, and children of the chosen people
assisted at frivolous performances, and regretted his inability to
suppress the graceless and godless gatherings. Both Jews and
Puritans in the seventeenth century were ready to subscribe to the
words of the Talmudic sage of the first: “I give thanks to thee, O Lord,
my God and God of my fathers, that thou hast placed my portion
among those who sit in the House of Learning and the House of
Prayer, and didst not cast my lot among those who frequent theatres
and circuses. For I labour, and they labour; I wait, and they wait; I to
131
inherit paradise, they the pit of destruction.”
Lastly, both Puritans and Jews had suffered sorely for dissent,
and they had both made others suffer as sorely for the same reason.
The heroic fortitude of both sects under affliction was disgraced by
their fierce intolerance when in power.
This close similarity in temperament and ideas found expression
in many ways, more or less marvellous, more or less amusing. It
originated that partiality to the Old Testament which was responsible
for most of the Puritans’ peculiarities and sins. The Lord’s Day in
their mouths became the Sabbath; their children were baptized by
the uncouth names of ancient Hebrew patriarchs and prophets; their
everyday conversation was a compound of sanctity and Semitism.
Hebrew was revered as the primitive tongue of mankind, and it was
held that a child brought up in solitude would naturally speak Hebrew
at four years of age. Not only were their notions on social and moral
questions derived from the code of Moses, but even in matters
judicial that code was gravely recommended as a substitute for
English jurisprudence, and the extreme Puritans, who migrated to
America, actually adopted the Mosaic law in Massachusetts, acted
Hebrew masquerades in the island of Rhode, and called the
members of the Constitutional Committee of New Haven “The seven
pillars hewn out for the House of Wisdom.” Last, but most important
of all, Cromwell’s Ironsides found in the Old Testament precedent
and sanction for deeds which are utterly abhorrent to the teaching of
the New.
Under the circumstances, it is not surprising that, while the
persecution of Papists and Episcopalians was at its highest in
England, the public attitude towards the Jews should have
undergone a marked change for the better. Members of the race
were already established in London, though secretly. On January 5,
1649, two inhabitants of Amsterdam presented to Fairfax and the
Army a petition for the repeal of the banishment of the Jews under
Edward I., and they must have found the public mind not unprepared
for their request. The question of the rehabilitation of the Jews
formed about this time the subject of earnest consideration in certain
circles. Edward Nicholas, ex-Secretary to Parliament, advocated it
with fervour and biblical erudition, declaring his belief that the
tribulations which England had endured for a generation were a
punishment for the expulsion of God’s people. A newspaper,
published on May 6, 1652, contains the account of a visit to a
synagogue in Leghorn by a friendly sailor, ending with the appeal,
“Shall they be tolerated by the Pope, and by the Duke of Florence,
by the Turks, and by the Barbarians and others, and shall England
132
1652 still have laws in force against them?” When Dr.
John Owen drew up his scheme for a national Church
and submitted it to Parliament, Major Butler and some others
attacked it as not liberal enough. Not only did they denounce
interference on the part of the State in matters spiritual and doctrinal,
but they asked: “Is it not the duty of magistrates to permit the Jews,
whose conversion we look for, to live freely and peaceably amongst
us?” Roger Williams was strongly on the same side, and so was
Whalley, the gallant Major of Naseby fame, both on religious and on
practical grounds.
As a result of this agitation in favour of Israel, four conferences
were publicly held for a discussion of the matter. The last of these
occurred on Wednesday, December 12th, 1655, at Whitehall, under
the presidency of the Protector. It was a great event, and it created a
deep sensation throughout the country. All the highest authorities of
the Church and the State assisted at the consultation, and argued
out the question whether the Jews should be permitted to settle and
trade in England again.
The proposer was Manasseh Ben Israel, a Rabbi of Amsterdam,
the son of a Marrano of Lisbon, who had suffered at the hands of the
Inquisition. Manasseh was a true patriot: rich in nothing but
Rabbinical and Cabbalistic lore, a fluent speaker, and a prolific
writer; withal a firm believer in the approaching advent of the
Messiah, and in his own divinely appointed mission to promote that
advent. Indeed, he had a family interest in the matter; for he had
married a descendant of the House of David, and entertained hopes
that, in accordance with the ancient prophecies, the King of Israel
might be among his own offspring. Manasseh, thinking that the
establishment of the Puritan Commonwealth and of liberty of
conscience in England, as well as the enormous attention paid by
the European world at that time to questions of biblical prophecy,
afforded an opportunity for the readmission of his co-religionists, had
already approached the English Puritans and Millennarians, and had
made several attempts to obtain a hearing of Parliament; but he had
failed until Cromwell’s accession to the head of affairs. Manasseh, in
his declaration to the Commonwealth of England, dwelt at great
length and with great historical knowledge on the loyalty shown by
the Jewish people in the countries where they were treated kindly.
Among other examples he quoted the heroic fidelity of the Jews of
133
Burgos to the fallen King of Castile, Don Pedro. But his principal
argument was that by the admission of the Jews into England the
biblical prophecies concerning the Messianic era—namely, that it
would not dawn until the Israelites had been dispersed through all
the nations of the earth—would be fulfilled, and thus the era itself
brought materially nearer. It was an argument well calculated to
appeal to an audience thirsting for the Millennium and the Fifth
Monarchy of the Apocalypse, and terribly anxious to pave the way
for the Redeemer.
Cromwell himself—whether influenced by Messianic
expectations, by the desire to win over the Jews to Christianity
through kindness, by broad principles of religious toleration, or by the
less aërial motive of making use of the Jews as a means of obtaining
intelligence on international affairs and of profiting by their wealth
and commercial ability—was earnestly in favour of Manasseh’s
proposal, and supported it with great eloquence. But it was not to be.
Though the conference decided that there was no legal obstacle to
the settlement of Jews in England, public opinion, and religious
sentiment more especially, were not yet ripe for so revolutionary a
measure. Despite the enlightened example of leaders like Cromwell
and Milton, the majority thought otherwise. Liberty of conscience?
they said. Yes, but within certain limits. So, after a long and
wearisome controversy, in which prophecies and statutes were
solemnly quoted by both sides, weighed and rejected, prejudice
prevailed over reason and Christian charity; and Manasseh Ben
Israel was obliged to depart—not quite empty-handed; for Cromwell
rewarded his labours in the good cause with an annual allowance of
one hundred pounds, which, however, the rabbi did not live to enjoy.
He died on the way to Amsterdam; like Moses, denied the
satisfaction of witnessing the fruit of his zeal. For, though a public
and general admission of his co-religionists was found impracticable,
it was understood that individual members of the race could settle in
the country by Cromwell’s private permission. Many availed
themselves of this privilege, in the teeth of strong opposition on the
part of the Christian merchants of the city, and soon a humble
synagogue and a Jewish cemetery were seen in London—nearly
four hundred years after their confiscation by Edward I.
1657
This return is still celebrated by English Jews as Re-
settlement Day, its anniversary constituting one of the few “red-letter
days” in their calendar. Nor is the man forgotten who practically
secured the boon. Manasseh’s memory is held in deservedly high
honour among Hebrews, and the English Jewish community in 1904
celebrated the 300th anniversary of his birth.
When, a few years after the settlement, the
1660
Commonwealth was overthrown by the Restoration,
the Jewish community survived their protector. Charles II., too needy
to despise the Jews, not bigoted enough to persecute them, followed
the tolerant policy of his great predecessor, and, though from entirely
different motives, granted to them the benefit of an unmolested, if
legally unrecognised, residence in his dominions. Mr. Pepys visited
their synagogue in London on October 13th, 1663, and seems to
have been greatly amazed, amused, and scandalised by what he
saw therein:
“After dinner my wife and I, by Mr. Rawlinson’s conduct, to the
Jewish Synagogue: where the men and boys in their vayles, and the
women behind a lettice out of sight; and some things stand up, which
I believe is their law, in a press to which all coming in do bow; and at
the putting on their vayles do say something, to which others that
hear the Priest do cry Amen, and the party do kiss his vayle. Their
service all in a singing way and in Hebrew. And anon their Laws that
they take out of the press are carried by several men, four or five
several burthens in all, and they do relieve one another; and whether
it is that every one desires to have the carrying of it, thus they carried
it round about the room while such a service is singing. And in the
end they had a prayer for the King, in which they pronounced his
name in Portugall; but the prayer, like the rest, in Hebrew.
“But, Lord! to see the disorder, laughing, sporting, and no
attention, but confusion in all their service, more like brutes than
people knowing the true God, would make a man forswear ever
seeing them more; and indeed I never did see so much, or could
have imagined there had been any religion in the whole world so
absurdly performed as this.”
Such was the impression which the Jewish congregation
produced on that keen observer of the surface of things.
The inference to be drawn from these sprightly comments is that
the Jew was far from having outlived his unpopularity. Though the
doctrine of toleration, for which Cromwell had fought and Milton
suffered, was still preached by divines like Taylor and expounded by
philosophers like Locke, the English public was far from recognising
every man’s right to think, act and worship as seemed good to him.
So hard it is even for the faintest ray of light to pierce the mists of
prejudice.
To Mr. Pepys we also owe a curious glimpse of the vigour with
which the Messianic Utopia was cherished at this time amongst us.
The fame of Sabbataï Zebi had reached England, and the Prophet of
Smyrna found adherents even in the city of London. We are in 1666,
on the eve of the mystic era fixed by enthusiasts as the year that
was to see the restoration of Israel to the Holy Land. Under date
February 19th, Mr. Pepys makes the following entry in his Diary;—“I
am told for certain, what I have heard once or twice already, of a Jew
in town, that in the name of the rest do offer to give any man £10 to
be paid £100, if a certain person now at Smyrna be within these two
years owned by all the Princes of the East, and particularly the
Grand Segnor, as the King of the world, in the same manner we do
the King of England here, and that this man is the true Messiah. One
named a friend of his that had received ten pieces in gold upon this
score, and says that the Jew hath disposed of £1,100 in this manner,
which is very strange; and certainly this year of 1666 will be a year of
great action; but what the consequences of it will be, God knows!”
1689 But the Messiah did not come; and twenty-four
years later, under William and Mary, an attempt was
made to fleece the unpopular race in London. It was proposed in the
Commons that £100,000 should be exacted from the Jews; and the
proposition impressed the House as tempting. But the Jews
presented a petition pleading their inability to comply and declaring
that they would rather leave the kingdom than submit to such
treatment. Their protest was seconded by statesmen who, be their
personal feelings towards the Jews what they might, objected to the
measure as contrary to the spirit of the British Constitution; and after
some discussion the project was abandoned, though not the
prejudice which had made such a proposal possible.
Sober Protestantism did not in the least share the Puritan
preference for Hebrew ideals. If the Spectator may be taken as a
mirror of public opinion on the subject, in the reign of Queen Anne,
English Protestants objected to “the Multiplicity of Ceremonies in the
Jewish Religion, as Washings, Dresses, Meats, Purgations, and the
like.” Addison states that the reason for these minute observances,
adduced by the Jews, was their anxiety to create as many occasions
as possible of showing their love to God, by doing in all
circumstances of life something to please Him. However, this
explanation does not seem convincing to the critic, who goes on to
remark that Roman Catholic apologists use similar arguments in
defence of their own rites, and concludes, “But, notwithstanding the
plausible Reason with which both the Jew and the Roman Catholick
would excuse their respective Superstitions, it is certain there is
something in them very pernicious to Mankind, and destructive to
134
Religion.” Accordingly, a statute of Queen Anne encouraged
conversion to Christianity by compelling Jewish parents to support
their apostate children.
Addison, elsewhere, recognises the advantages, commercial
and other, which the world owes to the Jews’ dispersion through the
nations of the earth; but he quaintly observes: “They are like the
Pegs and Nails in a great Building, which, though they are but little
valued in themselves, are absolutely necessary to keep the whole
135
Frame together.” He is impressed by the multitude of the Jews,
despite the decimations and persecutions to which they had been
exposed for so many centuries, no less than by their world-wide
dissemination and firm adherence to their religion; and he
endeavours to explain these remarkable phenomena by several
reflections which deserve to be quoted, not only on account of the
intrinsic sound sense of some of them, but also for the sake of the
picture which they present of the Jewish nation in the early days of
the eighteenth century, as it appeared to a highly cultured Gentile,
and of the highly cultured Gentile’s attitude towards the nation:
“I can,” says the Spectator, “in the first place attribute their
numbers to nothing but their constant Employment, their Abstinence,
their Exemption from Wars, and, above all, their frequent Marriages;
for they look on Celibacy as an accursed State, and generally are
married before Twenty, as hoping the Messiah may descend from
them.”
Their dispersion is explained as follows:
“They were always in Rebellions and Tumults while they had the
Temple and Holy City in View, for which reason they have often been
driven out of their old Habitations in the Land of Promise. They have
as often been banished out of most other Places where they have
settled.... Besides, the whole People is now a Race of such
Merchants as are Wanderers by Profession, and, at the same time,
are in most if not all Places incapable of either Lands or Offices, that
might engage them to make any part of the World their Home. This
Dispersion would probably have lost their Religion had it not been
secured by the Strength of its Constitution: For they are to live all in
a Body, and generally within the same Enclosure; to marry among
themselves, and to eat no Meats that are not killed or prepared their
own way. This shuts them out from all Table Conversation, and the
most agreeable Intercourses of Life; and, by consequence, excludes
them from the most probable Means of Conversion.
“If, in the last place, we consider what Providential Reason may
be assigned for these three Particulars, we shall find that their
Numbers, Dispersion, and Adherence to their Religion, have
furnished every Age, and every Nation of the World, with the
strongest Arguments for the Christian Faith, not only as these very
Particulars are foretold of them, but as they themselves are the
Depositories of these and all the other Prophecies, which tend to
their own Confusion. Their Number furnishes us with a sufficient
Cloud of Witnesses that attest the Truth of the Old Bible. Their
Dispersion spreads these Witnesses thro’ all parts of the World. The
Adherence to their Religion makes their Testimony unquestionable.
Had the whole Body of the Jews been converted to Christianity, we
should certainly have thought all the Prophecies of the Old
Testament, that relate to the Coming and History of our Blessed
Saviour, forged by Christians, and have looked upon them, with the
Prophecies of the Sybils, as made many Years after the Events they
pretended to foretell.”
This cold-blooded habit of drawing from the sufferings of fellow-
men an assurance of our own salvation is still cultivated by many
good Christians. It is a comfortable doctrine, though not particularly
complimentary to Providence.
1723 But if the progress of reason is slow, it is sure. A
few years after the publication of Addison’s essay, the
Jews already established in England were recognised as British
subjects. Two years later a Jewish mathematician was
1725
made Fellow of the Royal Society, and not long after a
Jew became secretary and librarian of the Society. Judges also
refrained from summoning Jewish witnesses on the Sabbath. The
concession of 1723 was followed, thirty years later, by
1753
the right of naturalisation. But, even then, though the
Commons passed the Bill, the Lords and the Bishops endorsed it,
and King George II. ratified it, so loud an outcry from traders and
theologians arose thereat that the gift had to be revoked. “No more
Jews, no wooden shoes,” was the elegant refrain in which the British
public sang its sentiments on the subject, and the effigy of an
enlightened Deacon, who had defended the Act, was burnt publicly
at Bristol. England, which in the Middle Ages had been induced to
persecute and expel the Jews by the example of the Continent, was
once more to be influenced by the Continental attitude towards the
race. Fortunately, this influence was now of a different kind.
CHAPTER XIX
THE EVE OF EMANCIPATION
About the middle of the eighteenth century a new spirit had arisen
on the Continent of Europe; or rather the spirit of the Renaissance,
suppressed in Italy, had re-asserted itself in Central Europe under a
more highly developed form. Seventeen hundred years had passed
since the heavenly choir sang on the plain of Bethlehem the glorious
anthem, “Peace on earth, good-will toward men.” And the message
which had been blotted out in blood, while the myth and the words
were worshipped, was once more heard in a totally different version.
Those who delivered it were not angels, but men of the world; the
audience not a group of rude Asiatic shepherds, but the most
polished of European publics; and the tongue in which it was
delivered not the simple Aramaic of Palestine, but the complex
vehicle of modern science. Once more man, by an entirely new
route, had arrived at the one great truth, the only true
commandment: “Love one another, O ye creatures of a day. Bear
with one another’s faults and follies. Life is too brief for hatred;
human blood too precious to be wasted in mutual destruction.”
It was the age of Voltaire, Diderot and Jean Jacques Rousseau
in France; of Lessing and Mendelssohn in Germany. The doctrine of
universal charity and happiness which, like its ancient prototype, was
later to be inculcated at the point of the sword and illustrated by
rape, murder, fire and famine, as yet found its chief expression in
poetical visions of freedom and in philosophical theories of equality
promulgated by sanguine Encyclopaedists. It was a period of lofty
aspirations not yet degraded by mediocre performance; and the
Jews, who had hitherto passively or actively shared in every stage of
Europe’s progress, were to participate in this development also.
Unlike the earlier awakenings of the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries,
this call for tolerance did not die away on the confines of
Christendom. The time had come for the question to be put: “Sind
Christ and Jude eher Christ und Jude als Mensch?” Israel was
destined to receive at the hands of Reason what Conscience had
proved unable to grant. And in this broader awakening both Teuton
and Latin were united. The French philosophers served the cause of
toleration by teaching that all religions are false; the German by
teaching that they are all true.
But, ere this triumph could be achieved, the Jews had to
overcome many and powerful enemies. Among these were the two
most famous men of the century.
1740–86 Frederick the Great, King of Prussia and ardent
friend of philosophy, appears anything but great or
philosophical in his policy towards the children of Israel. Under his
reign the prohibitive laws of the Middle Age were revived in a
manner which exceeded mediaeval legislation in thoroughness,
though it could not plead mediaeval barbarism as an excuse. Only a
limited number of Jews were permitted to reside in Frederick’s
dominions. By the “General Privilege” of 1750 they were divided into
two categories. In the first were included traders and officials of the
Synagogue. These had a hereditary right of residence restricted to
one child in each family. The right for a second child was purchased
by them for 70,000 thalers. The second division embraced persons
of independent means tolerated individually; but their right of abode
expired with them. The marriage regulations were so severe that
they condemned poor Jews to celibacy; while all Jews, rich and poor
alike, were debarred from liberal professions, and they all were
fleeced by taxes ruinous at once and ludicrous.
Voltaire, the arch-enemy of Feudalism, yet defended the feudal
attitude towards the Jews. His enmity for the race did not spring
entirely from capricious ill-humour. He had a grudge against the
Jews owing to some pecuniary losses sustained, as he complained,
through the bankruptcy of a Jewish capitalist of the name of Medina.
The story, as told by the inimitable story-teller himself, is worth
repeating: “Medina told me that he was not to blame for his
bankruptcy: that he was unfortunate, that he had never been a son
of Belial. He moved me, I embraced him, we praised God together,
and I lost my money. I have never hated the Jewish nation; I hate
136
nobody.”
1750–51 But this was not all. Whilst in Berlin, Voltaire waged
a protracted warfare against a Hebrew jeweller. It was
a contest between two great misers, each devoutly bent on over-
reaching the other. According to a good, if too emphatic, judge,
“nowhere, in the Annals of Jurisprudence, is there a more despicable
thing, or a deeper involved in lies and deliriums,” than this Voltaire-
137
Hirsch lawsuit. It arose out of a transaction of illegal stock-
jobbing. Voltaire had commissioned the Jew Hirsch to go to Dresden
and purchase a number of Saxon Exchequer bills—which were
payable in gold to genuine Prussian holders only—giving him for
payment a draft on Paris, due after some weeks, and receiving from
him a quantity of jewels in pledge, till the bills were delivered. Hirsch
went to Dresden, but sent no bills. Voltaire, suspecting foul play,
stopped payment of the Paris draft, and ordered Hirsch to come
back at once. On the Jew’s arrival an attempt at settlement was
made. Voltaire asked for his draft and offered to return the diamonds,
accompanied with a sum of money covering part of the Jew’s
travelling expenses. Hirsch on examining the diamonds declared that
some of them had been changed, and declined to accept them. It
was altogether a mauvaise affaire, and to this day it remains a
mystery which of the two litigants was more disingenuous.
The case ended in a sentence which forced Hirsch to restore the
Paris draft and Voltaire to buy the jewels at a price fixed by sworn
experts. Hirsch was at liberty to appeal, if he could prove that the
diamonds had been tampered with. In the meantime he was fined
ten thalers for falsely denying his signature. Voltaire shrieked
hysterically, trying to convince the world and himself that he had
triumphed. But the world, at all events, refused to be convinced. The
scandal formed the topic of conversation and comment throughout
the civilised world. Frederick’s own view of the case was that his
friend Voltaire had tried “to pick Jew pockets,” but, instead, had his
own pocket picked of some £150, and, moreover, he was made the
laughing-stock of Europe in pamphlets and lampoons innumerable—
one of these being a French comedy, Tantale en Procès, attributed
by some to Frederick himself; a poor production wherein the author
ridicules—to the best of his ability—the unfortunate philosopher. The
incident was not calculated to sweeten Voltaire’s temper, or to
enhance his affection for the Jewish people. Vain and vindictive, the
sage, with all his genius and his many amiable qualities, never forgot
an injury or forgave a defeat.
On the other hand, the Jews could boast not a few allies. Among
the champions of humanity, in the noblest sense of the term, none
was more earnest than Gotthold Ephraim Lessing, the prince of
modern critics. His pure and lofty nature had met with her kindred in
Moses Mendelssohn, the Jewish philosopher, born within the same
twelvemonth. The friendship which bound these two
1728–9
children of diverse races and creeds together was a
practical proof of Lessing’s own doctrine that virtue is international,
and that intellectual affinity recognises no theological boundaries.
This doctrine, already preached in most eloquent
1779
prose, found an artistic embodiment, and a universal
audience, in Nathan der Weise—the first appearance of the Jew on
the European stage as a human being, and a human being of the
very highest order. The Wise Nathan was no other than Moses
Mendelssohn, scarcely less remarkable a person than Lessing
himself. Years before Mendelssohn had left his native town of
Dessau and trudged on to Berlin in search of a future. A friendless
and penniless lad, timid, deformed, and repulsively ugly, he was with
the utmost difficulty admitted into the Prussian capital, of which he
was to become an ornament. For long years after his arrival in
Berlin, the gifted and destitute youth laboured and waited with the
patient optimism of one conscious of his own powers, until an
unwilling world was forced to recognise the beauty and heroism of
the soul which lurked under that most unpromising exterior; and the
Jewish beggar lad, grown into an awkward, stuttering and
insignificant-looking man, gradually rose to be the idol of a salon—
the eighteenth century equivalent for a shrine—at which every
foreign visitor of distinction and culture, irrespective of religion or

Essentials of Marketing Research 6Th Edition Babin Solutions Manual Full Chapter PDF

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Essentials of Marketing Research 6Th Edition Babin Solutions Manual Full Chapter PDF

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Chapter Seven: Survey Research

Essentials of Marketing Research

Test bank: https://testbankpack.com/p/test-bank-for-

Solution Manual: https://testbankpack.com/p/solution-

II. The Types of Information Gathered Using Surveys

III. Sources of Error in Surveys

iv. Social desirability bias

IV. Ways Marketing Researchers Conduct Survey Interviews

V. Conducting Personal Interviews

VI. Surveys Using Self-Administered Questionnaires

VII. Pretesting Survey Instruments

VIII. Ethical Issues in Survey Research

CHAPTER VIGNETTE: Mobile Surveys Catching On, and Catching

➢ Getting Sleepy, Sleepy, Sleepy

TIPS OF THE TRADE

II. THE TYPES OF INFORMATION GATHERED USING SURVEYS

III. SOURCES OF ERROR IN SURVEYS

IV. WAYS MARKETING RESEARCHERS CONDUCT SURVEY INTERVIEWS

V. CONDUCTING PERSONAL INTERVIEWS

VI. SURVEYS USING SELF-ADMINISTERED QUESTIONNAIRES

VII. PRETESTING SURVEY INSTRUMENTS

VIII. ETHICAL ISSUES IN SURVEY RESEARCH

QUESTIONS FOR REVIEW AND CRITICAL THINKING/ANSWERS

2. What is self-selection bias? Describe it as a source of total survey error.

Self-selection bias is a problem that frequently plagues self-administered questionnaires, such as

A survey is defined as a method of collecting primary data based on communication with a

“You call me misbeliever, cut-throat dog,

and yet you solicit my help.” The Christian answers:

“I am as like to call thee so again,

“This bond doth give thee here no jot of blood.

Shylock has scarcely recovered from this thunderclap, and

“The law hath yet another hold on you.

Antonio intercedes on behalf of his enemy, and allows him to

There was much in Cromwell’s followers to dispose them favourably

THE EVE OF EMANCIPATION

You might also like