内容分析和预测调查拒绝:受访者对参加面对面家庭心理健康调查的担忧是什么?

IF 1.1 3区 社会学 Q2 ANTHROPOLOGY Field Methods Pub Date : 2021-05-01 DOI:10.1177/1525822X211000856
Sanaa Hyder, L. Bilal, Z. Mneimneh, M. Naseem, E. Devol, Maggie Aradati, Mona K Shahab, Abdulrahman Binmuammar, A. Al‐Subaie, A. Al-Habeeb, Y. Altwaijri
{"title":"内容分析和预测调查拒绝:受访者对参加面对面家庭心理健康调查的担忧是什么?","authors":"Sanaa Hyder, L. Bilal, Z. Mneimneh, M. Naseem, E. Devol, Maggie Aradati, Mona K Shahab, Abdulrahman Binmuammar, A. Al‐Subaie, A. Al-Habeeb, Y. Altwaijri","doi":"10.1177/1525822X211000856","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Previous studies suggest that refusals form the largest proportion of nonresponse for household surveys. As face-to-face household health surveys are uncommon in several countries, it might be advantageous for prospective surveys to preemptively tackle respondents’ refusal to survey participation. Using contact history data from the Saudi National Mental Health Survey, we examined the relationship between social environmental factors, respondent characteristics, survey request concerns recorded by interviewers, and respondents’ propensity to refuse to participate in the survey. Content analysis and logistic regressions were conducted. Our findings suggest that urbanicity, region, socioeconomic status, age, and gender are associated with refusal. Patriarchal gatekeepers and specific survey-related concerns are more likely to lead to temporary refusals compared to final refusals. These results have implications for survey researchers employing similar recruitment and data collection methods, for example in tailoring refusal conversion strategies for interviewers to address concerns expressed by Saudi and/or culturally similar respondents.","PeriodicalId":48060,"journal":{"name":"Field Methods","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.1000,"publicationDate":"2021-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1177/1525822X211000856","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Content Analysis and Predicting Survey Refusal: What Are Respondents’ Concerns about Participating in a Face-to-face Household Mental Health Survey?\",\"authors\":\"Sanaa Hyder, L. Bilal, Z. Mneimneh, M. Naseem, E. Devol, Maggie Aradati, Mona K Shahab, Abdulrahman Binmuammar, A. Al‐Subaie, A. Al-Habeeb, Y. Altwaijri\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/1525822X211000856\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Previous studies suggest that refusals form the largest proportion of nonresponse for household surveys. As face-to-face household health surveys are uncommon in several countries, it might be advantageous for prospective surveys to preemptively tackle respondents’ refusal to survey participation. Using contact history data from the Saudi National Mental Health Survey, we examined the relationship between social environmental factors, respondent characteristics, survey request concerns recorded by interviewers, and respondents’ propensity to refuse to participate in the survey. Content analysis and logistic regressions were conducted. Our findings suggest that urbanicity, region, socioeconomic status, age, and gender are associated with refusal. Patriarchal gatekeepers and specific survey-related concerns are more likely to lead to temporary refusals compared to final refusals. These results have implications for survey researchers employing similar recruitment and data collection methods, for example in tailoring refusal conversion strategies for interviewers to address concerns expressed by Saudi and/or culturally similar respondents.\",\"PeriodicalId\":48060,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Field Methods\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-05-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1177/1525822X211000856\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Field Methods\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/1525822X211000856\",\"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":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/1525822X211000856","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: 1

摘要

先前的研究表明,在家庭调查中,拒绝回答的比例最大。由于面对面的家庭健康调查在几个国家并不常见,前瞻性调查先发制人地解决受访者拒绝参与调查的问题可能是有利的。利用沙特国家心理健康调查的接触史数据,我们研究了社会环境因素、受访者特征、受访者记录的调查请求担忧以及受访者拒绝参与调查的倾向之间的关系。进行内容分析和逻辑回归。我们的研究结果表明,城市、地区、社会经济地位、年龄和性别与拒绝有关。与最终拒绝相比,父权制的看门人和特定的调查相关问题更有可能导致临时拒绝。这些结果对采用类似招聘和数据收集方法的调查研究人员具有启示意义,例如为面试官量身定制拒绝转换策略,以解决沙特和/或文化相似受访者表达的担忧。
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
Content Analysis and Predicting Survey Refusal: What Are Respondents’ Concerns about Participating in a Face-to-face Household Mental Health Survey?
Previous studies suggest that refusals form the largest proportion of nonresponse for household surveys. As face-to-face household health surveys are uncommon in several countries, it might be advantageous for prospective surveys to preemptively tackle respondents’ refusal to survey participation. Using contact history data from the Saudi National Mental Health Survey, we examined the relationship between social environmental factors, respondent characteristics, survey request concerns recorded by interviewers, and respondents’ propensity to refuse to participate in the survey. Content analysis and logistic regressions were conducted. Our findings suggest that urbanicity, region, socioeconomic status, age, and gender are associated with refusal. Patriarchal gatekeepers and specific survey-related concerns are more likely to lead to temporary refusals compared to final refusals. These results have implications for survey researchers employing similar recruitment and data collection methods, for example in tailoring refusal conversion strategies for interviewers to address concerns expressed by Saudi and/or culturally similar respondents.
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