- Award ID(s):
- 1825113
- NSF-PAR ID:
- 10347061
- Date Published:
- Journal Name:
- Journal of survey statistics and methodology
- Volume:
- 10
- Issue:
- 2
- ISSN:
- 2325-0984
- Page Range / eLocation ID:
- 317-336
- Format(s):
- Medium: X
- Sponsoring Org:
- National Science Foundation
More Like this
-
Response time (RT) – the time elapsing from the beginning of question reading for a given question until the start of the next question – is a potentially important indicator of data quality that can be reliably measured for all questions in a computer-administered survey using a latent timer (i.e., triggered automatically by moving on to the next question). In interviewer-administered surveys, RTs index data quality by capturing the entire length of time spent on a question–answer sequence, including interviewer question-asking behaviors and respondent question-answering behaviors. Consequently, longer RTs may indicate longer processing or interaction on the part of the interviewer, respondent, or both. RTs are an indirect measure of data quality; they do not directly measure reliability or validity, and we do not directly observe what factors lengthen the administration time. In addition, either too long or too short RTs could signal a problem (Ehlen, Schober, and Conrad 2007). However, studies that link components of RTs (interviewers’ question reading and response latencies) to interviewer and respondent behaviors that index data quality strengthen the claim that RTs indicate data quality (Bergmann and Bristle 2019; Draisma and Dijkstra 2004; Olson, Smyth, and Kirchner 2019). In general, researchers tend to consider longer RTs as signaling processing problems for the interviewer, respondent, or both (Couper and Kreuter 2013; Olson and Smyth 2015; Yan and Olson 2013; Yan and Tourangeau 2008). Previous work demonstrates that RTs are associated with various characteristics of interviewers (where applicable), questions, and respondents in web, telephone, and face-to-face interviews (e.g., Couper and Kreuter 2013; Olson and Smyth 2015; Yan and Tourangeau 2008). We replicate and extend this research by examining how RTs are associated with various question characteristics and several established tools for evaluating questions. We also examine whether increased interviewer experience in the study shortens RTs for questions with characteristics that impact the complexity of the interviewer’s task (i.e., interviewer instructions and parenthetical phrases). We examine these relationships in the context of a sample of racially diverse respondents who answered questions about participation in medical research and their health.more » « less
-
This paper summarizes a set of design considerations that survey researchers exploring the potential for live video to substitute for in-person interviewing will need to address. While the solutions appropriate for a particular study are likely to vary, researchers will need to consider (at least) which sample members have access to video and will be willing and able to participate, which video platform(s) to use, whether interviews need to be scheduled in advance or are conducted on demand, how interviewers’ screens should be configured, the interviewer’s visual background and auditory environment, and how interviewers should be trained to administer video interviews, avoid bias, and be prepared to handle technological problems as they arise.more » « less
-
Abstract Rising costs and challenges of in-person interviewing have prompted major surveys to consider moving online and conducting live web-based video interviews. In this paper, we evaluate video mode effects using a two-wave experimental design in which respondents were randomized to either an interviewer-administered video or interviewer-administered in-person survey wave
after completing a self-administered online survey wave. This design permits testing of both within- and between-subject differences across survey modes. Our findings suggest that video interviewing is more comparable to in-person interviewing than online interviewing across multiple measures of satisficing, social desirability, and respondent satisfaction. -
This WIP paper describes a team approach to phenomenography on ethical engineering practice in the health products industry and its potential impact on research quality. Although qualitative researchers often conduct phenomenography collaboratively, most often a single individual leads the data collection and analysis; others primarily serve as critical reviewers. However, quality may be enhanced by involving collaborators as data analysts in “sustained cycles of scrutiny, debate and testing against the data” [1, p. 88], thus interweaving unique perspectives and insights throughout the analysis process. Nonetheless, collaborating in this intensive data analysis process also presents unique challenges. In this paper, we (1) describe the processes we are applying in an integrated team-based phenomenographic study, (2) identify how the team approach affects research quality, and (3) reflect on the challenges inherent to this process. We ground this reflective case study in the methodological literature on phenomenography. Our team strategies include multiple interviewers (and, when possible, two interviewers per inter-view), team communication through reflective memos, and integration of individual and team-based data analysis with peer critique of individual analyses. We compare our team approach with typical individual phenomenographic approaches, and we align our procedures with the five strategies of the Qualifying Qualitative Research Quality Framework, or Q3, designed by Walther, Sochacka, and Kellam [2]. In aligning strategies, we consider benefits and trade-offs.more » « less
-
Abstract Interviewers’ postinterview evaluations of respondents’ performance (IEPs) are paradata, used to describe the quality of the data obtained from respondents. IEPs are driven by a combination of factors, including respondents’ and interviewers’ sociodemographic characteristics and what actually transpires during the interview. However, relatively few studies examine how IEPs are associated with features of the response process, including facets of the interviewer-respondent interaction and patterns of responding that index data quality. We examine whether features of the response process—various respondents’ behaviors and response quality indicators—are associated with IEPs in a survey with a diverse set of respondents focused on barriers and facilitators to participating in medical research. We also examine whether there are differences in IEPs across respondents’ and interviewers’ sociodemographic characteristics. Our results show that both respondents’ behaviors and response quality indicators predict IEPs, indicating that IEPs reflect what transpires in the interview. In addition, interviewers appear to approach the task of evaluating respondents with differing frameworks, as evidenced by the variation in IEPs attributable to interviewers and associations between IEPs and interviewers’ gender. Further, IEPs were associated with respondents’ education and ethnoracial identity, net of respondents’ behaviors, response quality indicators, and sociodemographic characteristics of respondents and interviewers. Future research should continue to build on studies that examine the correlates of IEPs to better inform whether, when, and how to use IEPs as paradata about the quality of the data obtained.