建立德国难民小组研究:第一波反应与小组损耗的比较研究

IF 1.1 3区 社会学 Q2 ANTHROPOLOGY Field Methods Pub Date : 2023-10-19 DOI:10.1177/1525822x231204817
Jannes Jacobsen, Manuel Siegert
{"title":"建立德国难民小组研究:第一波反应与小组损耗的比较研究","authors":"Jannes Jacobsen, Manuel Siegert","doi":"10.1177/1525822x231204817","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This article analyzes whether response patterns in surveys differ between the general population, regular immigrants, and recent refugees. Analyses show that the address quality of refugees contacted in the first wave of a panel study is worse than that of the general population, but of a similar quality to that of other recent immigrants. Once contacted, people in refugee households are more willing than others to participate in the first wave. In subsequent waves, this pattern changes. Address quality remains relatively low, and the motivation to participate deteriorates and is worse in comparison with other populations. However, Cox regression models of individual response behaviour reveal that this is mostly a composition effect. When socio-demographic and interviewer characteristics are taken into account, refugees have a lower risk of attrition than other immigrants, but they have a similar risk as the general population. This article provides important insights for the implementation of research about recent immigrants and refugees into ongoing panel studies.","PeriodicalId":48060,"journal":{"name":"Field Methods","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.1000,"publicationDate":"2023-10-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Establishing a Panel Study of Refugees in Germany: First Wave Response and Panel Attrition from a Comparative Perspective\",\"authors\":\"Jannes Jacobsen, Manuel Siegert\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/1525822x231204817\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"This article analyzes whether response patterns in surveys differ between the general population, regular immigrants, and recent refugees. Analyses show that the address quality of refugees contacted in the first wave of a panel study is worse than that of the general population, but of a similar quality to that of other recent immigrants. Once contacted, people in refugee households are more willing than others to participate in the first wave. In subsequent waves, this pattern changes. Address quality remains relatively low, and the motivation to participate deteriorates and is worse in comparison with other populations. However, Cox regression models of individual response behaviour reveal that this is mostly a composition effect. When socio-demographic and interviewer characteristics are taken into account, refugees have a lower risk of attrition than other immigrants, but they have a similar risk as the general population. This article provides important insights for the implementation of research about recent immigrants and refugees into ongoing panel studies.\",\"PeriodicalId\":48060,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Field Methods\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-10-19\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Field Methods\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/1525822x231204817\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"ANTHROPOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Field Methods","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/1525822x231204817","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

摘要

本文分析了调查中的反应模式在普通人群、普通移民和最近的难民之间是否存在差异。分析表明,在第一波小组研究中接触到的难民的地址质量比一般人口差,但与其他新移民的地址质量相似。一旦联系上,难民家庭的人比其他人更愿意参与第一波。在随后的浪潮中,这种模式发生了变化。演讲质量仍然相对较低,参与的动机恶化,与其他人群相比更差。然而,个体反应行为的Cox回归模型显示,这主要是一种组合效应。当考虑到社会人口统计学和面试官的特征时,难民的流失风险比其他移民低,但他们的风险与一般人群相似。本文为将近期移民和难民研究纳入正在进行的小组研究提供了重要的见解。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Establishing a Panel Study of Refugees in Germany: First Wave Response and Panel Attrition from a Comparative Perspective
This article analyzes whether response patterns in surveys differ between the general population, regular immigrants, and recent refugees. Analyses show that the address quality of refugees contacted in the first wave of a panel study is worse than that of the general population, but of a similar quality to that of other recent immigrants. Once contacted, people in refugee households are more willing than others to participate in the first wave. In subsequent waves, this pattern changes. Address quality remains relatively low, and the motivation to participate deteriorates and is worse in comparison with other populations. However, Cox regression models of individual response behaviour reveal that this is mostly a composition effect. When socio-demographic and interviewer characteristics are taken into account, refugees have a lower risk of attrition than other immigrants, but they have a similar risk as the general population. This article provides important insights for the implementation of research about recent immigrants and refugees into ongoing panel studies.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 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