TY - JOUR
T1 - Do interviewer postsurvey evaluations of respondents' engagement measure who respondents are or what they do? A behavior coding study
AU - Kirchner, Antje
AU - Olson, Kristen
AU - Smyth, Jolene D.
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© The Author 2017. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the American Association for Public Opinion Research. All rights reserved.
PY - 2017/12/12
Y1 - 2017/12/12
N2 - Survey interviewers are often tasked with assessing the quality of respondents' answers after completing a survey interview. These interviewer observations have been used to proxy for measurement error in interviewer-administered surveys. How interviewers formulate these evaluations and how well they proxy for measurement error has received little empirical attention. According to dual-process theories of impression formation, individuals form impressions about others based on the social categories of the observed person (e.g., sex, race) and individual behaviors observed during an interaction. Although initial impressions start with heuristic, rule-of-thumb evaluations, systematic processing is characterized by extensive incorporation of available evidence. In a survey context, if interviewers default to heuristic information processing when evaluating respondent engagement, then we expect their evaluations to be primarily based on respondent characteristics and stereotypes associated with those characteristics. Under systematic processing, on the other hand, interviewers process and evaluate respondents based on observable respondent behaviors occurring during the question-answering process. We use the Work and Leisure Today Survey, including survey data and behavior codes, to examine proxy measures of heuristic and systematic processing by interviewers as predictors of interviewer postsurvey evaluations of respondents' cooperativeness, interest, friendliness, and talkativeness. Our results indicate that CATI interviewers base their evaluations on actual behaviors during an interview (i.e., systematic processing) rather than perceived characteristics of the respondent or the interviewer (i.e., heuristic processing). These results are reassuring for the many surveys that collect interviewer observations as proxies for data quality.
AB - Survey interviewers are often tasked with assessing the quality of respondents' answers after completing a survey interview. These interviewer observations have been used to proxy for measurement error in interviewer-administered surveys. How interviewers formulate these evaluations and how well they proxy for measurement error has received little empirical attention. According to dual-process theories of impression formation, individuals form impressions about others based on the social categories of the observed person (e.g., sex, race) and individual behaviors observed during an interaction. Although initial impressions start with heuristic, rule-of-thumb evaluations, systematic processing is characterized by extensive incorporation of available evidence. In a survey context, if interviewers default to heuristic information processing when evaluating respondent engagement, then we expect their evaluations to be primarily based on respondent characteristics and stereotypes associated with those characteristics. Under systematic processing, on the other hand, interviewers process and evaluate respondents based on observable respondent behaviors occurring during the question-answering process. We use the Work and Leisure Today Survey, including survey data and behavior codes, to examine proxy measures of heuristic and systematic processing by interviewers as predictors of interviewer postsurvey evaluations of respondents' cooperativeness, interest, friendliness, and talkativeness. Our results indicate that CATI interviewers base their evaluations on actual behaviors during an interview (i.e., systematic processing) rather than perceived characteristics of the respondent or the interviewer (i.e., heuristic processing). These results are reassuring for the many surveys that collect interviewer observations as proxies for data quality.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85044274846&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85044274846&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1093/poq/nfx026
DO - 10.1093/poq/nfx026
M3 - Review article
AN - SCOPUS:85044274846
SN - 0033-362X
VL - 81
SP - 817
EP - 846
JO - Public Opinion Quarterly
JF - Public Opinion Quarterly
IS - 4
ER -