Skip to main content
Article thumbnail
Location of Repository

Effects of interviewer attitudes and behaviors on refusal in household surveys

By Gabriele B. Durrant, Robert M. Groves, Laura Staetsky and Fiona Steele

Abstract

Interviewers play a crucial role in gaining cooperation from a sample unit. This paper aims to identify the interviewer characteristics that influence survey cooperation. Of principal interest to survey practitioners are interviewer attributes associated with higher cooperation rates, particularly among sample members whose characteristics are traditionally associated with a lower probability of response. Our data source is unusually rich, in that it contains extensive information on interviewers, including their attitudes and behaviors, which are linked to detailed information on both responding and nonresponding sample units. An important value of the data is that they permit examining a host of as yet unanswered questions about whether some interviewer attributes stimulate cooperation among some respondents but not others. In short, we investigate whether some sample units react favorably to certain interviewer characteristics. A multilevel cross-classified logistic model with random interviewer effects is used to account for clustering of households within interviewers, due to unmeasured interviewer attributes, and for the cross-classification of interviewers within areas. The model allows for statistical interactions between interviewer and household characteristics.<br/><br/>We find that interviewer confidence and attitudes toward persuading reluctant respondents play an important role in explaining between-interviewer variation in refusal rates. We also find evidence of interaction effects between the interviewer and householder, for example with respect to gender and educational level, supporting the notion of similarity between interviewers and respondents generating higher cooperation. The results are discussed with respect to potential implications for survey practice and desig

Topics: BF, HA
Year: 2010
OAI identifier: oai:eprints.soton.ac.uk:181035
Provided by: e-Prints Soton

Suggested articles

Citations

  1. (1951). A Field Study of Interviewer Effects on the Quality of Survey Data.” doi
  2. (1999). A Multilevel Exploration of the Role of Interviewers in doi
  3. (2004). A Simultaneous Analysis of Interviewer Effects on Various Data Quality Indicators with Identification of Exceptional Interviewers.”
  4. (2008). A User’s Guide to MLwiN version 2.10.
  5. (1978). An Interviewer Variance Study for the Eight Impact doi
  6. (1951). Differences in Response Rates of Experienced and Inexperienced doi
  7. (2000). Different Measures of Vulnerability in Their Relation to Different Dimensions doi
  8. (2005). Do Interviewers’ Voice Characteristics Influence Cooperation Rates In doi
  9. (2006). Evaluation of Survey Data Quality Using Matched Census Survey Records.” Survey Methods Bulletin, Office for National Statistics.
  10. (1985). Gender Effects among Telephone Interviewers in a doi
  11. (1994). Hierarchical Regression Models for Interviewer and doi
  12. (1993). Interviewer Approaches.
  13. (1997). Keeping the Gate: Declinations to the Request to Participate in a Telephone Survey Interview.” Sociological Methods and Research. doi
  14. (2008). MCMC Estimation in MLwiN v2.10.
  15. (1998). Measuring Survey Quality in a CASIC Environment.”
  16. (2008). MLwiN v2.10.
  17. (2009). Multilevel Modelling of Refusal and Noncontact Nonresponse in Household Surveys: Evidence from doi
  18. (2003). Multilevel Statistical Models. third edition. doi
  19. (1998). Nonresponse in Household Interview Surveys. doi
  20. (1999). Participation Rates in a Case-Control Study: The Impact of Age, Race, doi
  21. (2002). Refusal Conversation and Tailoring”,
  22. (2001). Separating Interviewer and Sampling Point Effects.”
  23. (2002). Standardization and Tacit Running header.
  24. (1990). Standardized Survey Interviewing; Minimizing Interviewer-Related Error. doi
  25. (2002). Tacit Knowledge: Interaction and Practice in the Survey Interview”,
  26. (2007). The Effects of Incentives, Interview Length, and Interviewer Characteristics on Response Rates in a CATI-Study.” doi
  27. (2002). The Influence of Interviewers’ Attitude and Behavior on Household Survey Nonresponse: An International Comparison.” in:
  28. (1998). The Scope for Reducing Refusals in Household Surveys: An Investigation based on
  29. (1992). Understanding the Decision to Participate in a Survey.” Public Opinion Quarterly. doi

To submit an update or takedown request for this paper, please submit an Update/Correction/Removal Request.