Abstract

The paper deals with a highly controversial issue in survey data collection: the standardization of the interviewer’s behaviour during the interviewee’s selection of response alternatives. In the light of a large set of data drawn from several methodological studies published in the last 50 years, the author documents a counter‐intuitive issue: (1) interviewer’s errors are of secondary importance and far smaller than respondents’ errors; and (2) in order to minimize respondent’s errors, we need to broaden the interviewer’s tasks. Focusing on the unsolved problem of multiple word meanings of response alternatives as a relevant part of response bias, the author argues that data quality can be achieved by entrusting to the interviewer a more active role. Of course, the aim of reducing respondent’s errors by broadening interviewer’s tasks will surely produce an increase in the interviewer’s effects on answers. However, the dilemma to be faced is which kind of errors we prefer (and are more useful) to minimize.

Full Text
Paper version not known

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call

Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.