摘要：The premise is made that semantic ambiguity, which is manifested in measuring instruments, could lead to controversial and divergent research results often reported in studies on work motivation. Researchers, the literature indicates, are largely unaware of this phenomenon. In this investigation no studies were found in which semantic ambiguity in questionnaires had been controlled. In order to demonstrate the existence of semantic ambiguity as a phenomenon, a semantic differential was administered to 38 Industrial Psychology students in order to measure the meaning of the items on the Pottas Need Questionnaire. The results indicated that six of the 13 questionnaire items differed significantly from the need categories they purported to measure, which confirmed the notion that semantic ambiguity is a source of variance that should be controlled.OpsommingDit word aangevoer dat semantiese meerduidigheid, wat in meetinstrumente gemanifesteer word, die navorser se resultate kan kontamineer. Daar word voorts gesuggereer dat semantiese meerduidigheid 'n oorsaak kan wees van kontroversiële en uiteenlopende navorsingsresultate in studies wat betrekking het op 'n aantal motiveringsteorieë. 'n Oorsig van relevante literatuur dui daarop dat navorsers grootliks onbewus is van hierdie verskynsel en in hierdie ondersoek is geen gevalle gevind waar semantiese meerduidigheid in vraelyste gekontroleer is nie. Betekenismeting van die Pottasvraelys is in die ondersoek, deur middel van 'n semantiese differensiaal op 38 studente in die Bedryfsielkunde uitgevoer. Die resultate toon dat ses van die 13 vraelysitems semanties beduidend verskil van die behoeftekategorieë wat hulle veronderstel is om te meet. Die vermoede word sodoende bevestig dat semantiese meerduidigheid 'n bron van variansie is wat as sulks gekontroleer behoort te word.
