Literature DB >> 12697210

An investigation into expectation-led interviewer effects in health surveys.

Paul Clarke1, Kerry Sproston, Roger Thomas.   

Abstract

Many large-scale health surveys use interviewers to obtain standardised information about the health of the general population. To improve response rates and data quality, the researchers/designers usually brief the interviewers to familiarise them with the survey procedures and stimulate their interest in the survey. However, it is possible that interviewers, having been exposed to researchers' expectations, may inadvertently influence respondents to produce outcomes consistent with those expectations. Such expectations are referred to here as 'expectation-led interviewer effects'. In this paper, the design and results from an experiment to test for expectation-led interviewer effects are described. The experiment involved conducting two health surveys, called the 'experimental' and the 'control', which were identical in every way except that researchers made a reference to a supposed link between childhood and adult health at the experimental survey briefing. The testing procedure was designed prior to data collection to preclude accusations of data dredging and to ensure that the type I error probability was less than 5 percent. No consistent evidence of expectation-led interviewer effects was found, bar a statistically significant effect for health questions requiring the recall of detailed quantitative information. This effect was small, however.

Mesh:

Year:  2003        PMID: 12697210     DOI: 10.1016/s0277-9536(02)00238-1

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Soc Sci Med        ISSN: 0277-9536            Impact factor:   4.634


  5 in total

1.  Communication failures in patient sign-out and suggestions for improvement: a critical incident analysis.

Authors:  V Arora; J Johnson; D Lovinger; H J Humphrey; D O Meltzer
Journal:  Qual Saf Health Care       Date:  2005-12

Review 2.  Interviewer effects in public health surveys.

Authors:  R E Davis; M P Couper; N K Janz; C H Caldwell; K Resnicow
Journal:  Health Educ Res       Date:  2009-09-17

3.  Determining the interviewer effect on CQ Index outcomes: a multilevel approach.

Authors:  Sjenny Winters; Mathilde H Strating; Niek S Klazinga; Rudolf B Kool; Robbert Huijsman
Journal:  BMC Med Res Methodol       Date:  2010-08-19       Impact factor: 4.615

4.  A new transient sham TENS device allows for investigator blinding while delivering a true placebo treatment.

Authors:  Barbara Rakel; Nicholas Cooper; Heather J Adams; Bryan R Messer; Laura A Frey Law; Douglas R Dannen; Carrie A Miller; Anya C Polehna; Rachelle C Ruggle; Carol G T Vance; Deirdre M Walsh; Kathleen A Sluka
Journal:  J Pain       Date:  2009-11-27       Impact factor: 5.820

5.  A proposal for assessing study quality: Biomonitoring, Environmental Epidemiology, and Short-lived Chemicals (BEES-C) instrument.

Authors:  Judy S LaKind; Jon R Sobus; Michael Goodman; Dana Boyd Barr; Peter Fürst; Richard J Albertini; Tye E Arbuckle; Greet Schoeters; Yu-Mei Tan; Justin Teeguarden; Rogelio Tornero-Velez; Clifford P Weisel
Journal:  Environ Int       Date:  2014-08-17       Impact factor: 9.621

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.