>Dragan,
>
>Thanks for your detailed reply. At this point, my biggest problem is building an easy to use, systematic interface for BUILDING the questionnaire, administration is more straightforward. But I am really set on the 'tree' vs. network idea, ie. that each branch is unique. Although it may introduce a lot of redundant questions. I need a systematic way to add a question, define possible answers, define a branch to question for EACH possible answer, then, systematically, create the next question (or select it from an existing bank of questions ?), then, go back to the previous question, and repeat the process until all branch possibilities are covered, then, move on to the first of the most recently defined new branches, and define branches for it.
>
>Does this sound feasible ? Does it make sense ? How to implement ???

You just got me thinking about this, and as soon as I started this sentence, I forgot what I wanted to say, because a different idea jumped into my mind: what if (there he goes), what if you first entered all the questions and scales (i.e. sets of answers - there may be lots of questions with same sets, so you'd want to get that normalized), and then just created a table of jumps between existing questions? I'm thinking of a table with source-answer-target table, so you could just have the source question's ID (its position inside the questionnaire, not its ID from the question table), the value of the answer, and the target question's ID. The only rule would be there's no going back, i.e. the target ID must be greather than source ID.

As for an interface, you'd only need three combos - to pick these three. Refresh the third after a choice on first to enforce the rule, and refresh the second to have its set of available values.

Do I have a beer, or am I taking you to the wrong direction? I'm not sure we're on the same page, you know, I haven't seen too much of those Cobol-style questionnaires (or should I say the few I saw were too much for me :).