项目位置、访谈者-受访者互动以及对电话调查中电池问题的回答

IF 2.4 2区 社会学 Q1 SOCIOLOGY Sociological Methodology Pub Date : 2018-06-18 DOI:10.1177/0081175018778299
Kristen Olson, Jolene D Smyth, Beth Cochran
{"title":"项目位置、访谈者-受访者互动以及对电话调查中电池问题的回答","authors":"Kristen Olson, Jolene D Smyth, Beth Cochran","doi":"10.1177/0081175018778299","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Survey researchers often ask a series of attitudinal questions with a common question stem and response options, known as battery questions. Interviewers have substantial latitude in deciding how to administer these items, including whether to reread the common question stem on items after the first one or to probe respondents’ answers. Despite the ubiquity of use of these items, there is virtually no research on whether respondent and interviewer behaviors on battery questions differ over items in a battery or whether interview behaviors are associated with answers to these questions. This article uses a nationally representative telephone survey with audio-recorded interviews and randomized placement of items within four different batteries to examine interviewer and respondent behaviors and respondent answers in battery questions. Using cross-classified random-effects models, the authors find strong evidence that there is more interviewer–respondent interaction on items asked earlier in the battery. In addition, interviewer and respondent behaviors are associated with both substantive and nonsubstantive answers provided to battery items, especially if the interviewer decided to reread or probe with the response options. These results suggest that survey designers should follow recommendations to randomize battery items and consider the importance of standardization of question administration when designing battery questions.","PeriodicalId":48140,"journal":{"name":"Sociological Methodology","volume":"48 1","pages":"225 - 268"},"PeriodicalIF":2.4000,"publicationDate":"2018-06-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1177/0081175018778299","citationCount":"6","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Item Location, the Interviewer–Respondent Interaction, and Responses to Battery Questions in Telephone Surveys\",\"authors\":\"Kristen Olson, Jolene D Smyth, Beth Cochran\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/0081175018778299\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Survey researchers often ask a series of attitudinal questions with a common question stem and response options, known as battery questions. Interviewers have substantial latitude in deciding how to administer these items, including whether to reread the common question stem on items after the first one or to probe respondents’ answers. Despite the ubiquity of use of these items, there is virtually no research on whether respondent and interviewer behaviors on battery questions differ over items in a battery or whether interview behaviors are associated with answers to these questions. This article uses a nationally representative telephone survey with audio-recorded interviews and randomized placement of items within four different batteries to examine interviewer and respondent behaviors and respondent answers in battery questions. Using cross-classified random-effects models, the authors find strong evidence that there is more interviewer–respondent interaction on items asked earlier in the battery. In addition, interviewer and respondent behaviors are associated with both substantive and nonsubstantive answers provided to battery items, especially if the interviewer decided to reread or probe with the response options. These results suggest that survey designers should follow recommendations to randomize battery items and consider the importance of standardization of question administration when designing battery questions.\",\"PeriodicalId\":48140,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Sociological Methodology\",\"volume\":\"48 1\",\"pages\":\"225 - 268\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2018-06-18\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1177/0081175018778299\",\"citationCount\":\"6\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Sociological Methodology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/0081175018778299\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"SOCIOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Sociological Methodology","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/0081175018778299","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"SOCIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 6

摘要

调查研究人员经常提出一系列态度问题,这些问题有一个常见的问题干和回答选项,称为电池问题。面试官在决定如何管理这些项目时有很大的自由度,包括是重读第一个项目后的常见问题词干,还是探究受访者的答案。尽管这些项目的使用无处不在,但实际上没有研究受访者和面试官在电池问题上的行为是否与电池中的项目不同,或者面试行为是否与这些问题的答案有关。这篇文章使用了一项具有全国代表性的电话调查,包括录音采访和在四个不同的电池内随机放置项目,以检查采访者和受访者的行为以及受访者在电池问题中的回答。通过使用交叉分类的随机效应模型,作者发现了强有力的证据,证明在小组早期提出的问题上,访谈者和受访者之间有更多的互动。此外,面试官和受访者的行为与对电池项目提供的实质性和非实质性回答有关,尤其是当面试官决定重读或探究回答选项时。这些结果表明,调查设计者在设计电池问题时,应遵循随机化电池项目的建议,并考虑问题管理标准化的重要性。
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
Item Location, the Interviewer–Respondent Interaction, and Responses to Battery Questions in Telephone Surveys
Survey researchers often ask a series of attitudinal questions with a common question stem and response options, known as battery questions. Interviewers have substantial latitude in deciding how to administer these items, including whether to reread the common question stem on items after the first one or to probe respondents’ answers. Despite the ubiquity of use of these items, there is virtually no research on whether respondent and interviewer behaviors on battery questions differ over items in a battery or whether interview behaviors are associated with answers to these questions. This article uses a nationally representative telephone survey with audio-recorded interviews and randomized placement of items within four different batteries to examine interviewer and respondent behaviors and respondent answers in battery questions. Using cross-classified random-effects models, the authors find strong evidence that there is more interviewer–respondent interaction on items asked earlier in the battery. In addition, interviewer and respondent behaviors are associated with both substantive and nonsubstantive answers provided to battery items, especially if the interviewer decided to reread or probe with the response options. These results suggest that survey designers should follow recommendations to randomize battery items and consider the importance of standardization of question administration when designing battery questions.
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
CiteScore
4.50
自引率
0.00%
发文量
12
期刊介绍: Sociological Methodology is a compendium of new and sometimes controversial advances in social science methodology. Contributions come from diverse areas and have something useful -- and often surprising -- to say about a wide range of topics ranging from legal and ethical issues surrounding data collection to the methodology of theory construction. In short, Sociological Methodology holds something of value -- and an interesting mix of lively controversy, too -- for nearly everyone who participates in the enterprise of sociological research.
期刊最新文献
Contextual Embeddings in Sociological Research: Expanding the Analysis of Sentiment and Social Dynamics Using Relative Distribution Methods to Study Economic Polarization across Categories and Contexts Can Human Reading Validate a Topic Model? Question-Order Effect in the Study of Satisfaction with Democracy: Lessons from Three Split-Ballot Experiments Comparing the Robustness of Simple Network Scale-Up Method Estimators
×
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