Questioning Identity: How a Diverse Set of Respondents Answer Standard Questions About Ethnicity and Race

IF 1.1 3区 社会学 Q2 ANTHROPOLOGY Field Methods Pub Date : 2023-05-24 DOI:10.1177/1525822x231173805
D. Garbarski, Jennifer Dykema, Cameron P. Jones, Tiffany S. Neman, N. C. Schaeffer, Dorothy Farrar Edwards
{"title":"Questioning Identity: How a Diverse Set of Respondents Answer Standard Questions About Ethnicity and Race","authors":"D. Garbarski, Jennifer Dykema, Cameron P. Jones, Tiffany S. Neman, N. C. Schaeffer, Dorothy Farrar Edwards","doi":"10.1177/1525822x231173805","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Ethnoracial identity refers to the racial and ethnic categories that people use to classify themselves and others. How it is measured in surveys has implications for understanding inequalities. Yet how people self-identify may not conform to the categories standardized survey questions use to measure ethnicity and race, leading to potential measurement error. In interviewer-administered surveys, answers to survey questions are achieved through interviewer–respondent interaction. An analysis of interviewer–respondent interaction can illuminate whether, when, how, and why respondents experience problems with questions. In this study, we examine how indicators of interviewer–respondent interactional problems vary across ethnoracial groups when respondents answer questions about ethnicity and race. Further, we explore how interviewers respond in the presence of these interactional problems. Data are provided by the 2013–2014 Voices Heard Survey, a computer-assisted telephone survey designed to measure perceptions of participating in medical research among an ethnoracially diverse sample of respondents.","PeriodicalId":48060,"journal":{"name":"Field Methods","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.1000,"publicationDate":"2023-05-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Field Methods","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/1525822x231173805","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ANTHROPOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Ethnoracial identity refers to the racial and ethnic categories that people use to classify themselves and others. How it is measured in surveys has implications for understanding inequalities. Yet how people self-identify may not conform to the categories standardized survey questions use to measure ethnicity and race, leading to potential measurement error. In interviewer-administered surveys, answers to survey questions are achieved through interviewer–respondent interaction. An analysis of interviewer–respondent interaction can illuminate whether, when, how, and why respondents experience problems with questions. In this study, we examine how indicators of interviewer–respondent interactional problems vary across ethnoracial groups when respondents answer questions about ethnicity and race. Further, we explore how interviewers respond in the presence of these interactional problems. Data are provided by the 2013–2014 Voices Heard Survey, a computer-assisted telephone survey designed to measure perceptions of participating in medical research among an ethnoracially diverse sample of respondents.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
质疑身份:不同的受访者如何回答有关民族和种族的标准问题
民族身份是指人们用来对自己和他人进行分类的种族和民族类别。在调查中如何衡量它对理解不平等有着重要意义。然而,人们的自我识别方式可能不符合标准化调查问题用于衡量种族和种族的类别,从而导致潜在的测量误差。在面试官管理的调查中,调查问题的答案是通过面试官与受访者的互动来实现的。对面试官与受访者互动的分析可以说明受访者是否、何时、如何以及为什么会遇到问题。在这项研究中,我们考察了当受访者回答有关种族和种族的问题时,不同种族群体的访谈者-受访者互动问题的指标是如何变化的。此外,我们还探讨了面试官在面对这些互动问题时的反应。数据由2013-2014年声音听力调查提供,这是一项计算机辅助的电话调查,旨在衡量种族多样的受访者对参与医学研究的看法。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Field Methods
Field Methods Multiple-
CiteScore
2.70
自引率
5.90%
发文量
41
期刊介绍: Field Methods (formerly Cultural Anthropology Methods) is devoted to articles about the methods used by field wzorkers in the social and behavioral sciences and humanities for the collection, management, and analysis data about human thought and/or human behavior in the natural world. Articles should focus on innovations and issues in the methods used, rather than on the reporting of research or theoretical/epistemological questions about research. High-quality articles using qualitative and quantitative methods-- from scientific or interpretative traditions-- dealing with data collection and analysis in applied and scholarly research from writers in the social sciences, humanities, and related professions are all welcome in the pages of the journal.
期刊最新文献
ChatGPTest: Opportunities and Cautionary Tales of Utilizing AI for Questionnaire Pretesting What predicts willingness to participate in a follow-up panel study among respondents to a national web/mail survey? Invited Review: Collecting Data through Dyadic Interviews: A Systematic Review Offering Web Response as a Refusal Conversion Technique in a Mixed-mode Survey Network of Categories: A Method to Aggregate Egocentric Network Survey Data into a Whole Network Structure
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1