An Evaluation of the Effects of Interviewer Characteristics in an RDD Telephone Survey of Drug Use

Although a small number of studies are available that evaluate the effects of interviewer characteristics in substance use surveys conducted in person, none have done so using information collected via telephone interviews. We address this issue by examining the utility of social attribution and social desirability models for detecting the presence of interviewer effects in a large statewide telephone survey concerned with substance use. The specific outcome variables of interest were reports of lifetime and 18-month composite drug use. Analyses focus on the direct effects of individual interviewer characteristics (to assess social attribution) and a summary measure of interviewer-respondent similarity (to assess social distance) and employ random effects regression models to control for respondent clustering by interviewer. Results are most consistent with a social distance model and suggest that social distance between respondent and interviewer may decrease the probability of respondents reporting substance use behavior.

[1]  B. Dohrenwend,et al.  Social Distance and Interviewer Effects , 1968 .

[2]  Pamela J. Shoemaker,et al.  Ethnicity-of-Interviewer Effects Among Mexican-Americans and Anglos , 1986 .

[3]  S. M. Rogers,et al.  Adolescent sexual behavior, drug use, and violence: increased reporting with computer survey technology. , 1998, Science.

[4]  Aída Hurtado,et al.  DOES SIMILARITY BREED RESPECT? INTERVIEWER EVALUATIONS OF MEXICAN-DESCENT RESPONDENTS IN A BILINGUAL SURVEY , 1994 .

[5]  L Harrison,et al.  Introduction--the validity of self-reported drug use: improving the accuracy of survey estimates. , 1997, NIDA research monograph.

[6]  Bruce D. Johnson,et al.  The Reliability and Validity of Drug Use Responses in a Large Scale Longitudinal Survey , 1975 .

[7]  D. Kandel,et al.  UNDERREPORTING OF SUBSTANCE USE IN A NATIONAL LONGITUDINAL YOUTH COHORT INDIVIDUAL AND INTERVIEWER EFFECTS , 1988 .

[8]  Sheree T. Kwong See,et al.  Intergenerational Communication: The Survey Interview as a Social Exchange , 1999 .

[9]  Nathan Mantel,et al.  Chi-square tests with one degree of freedom , 1963 .

[10]  Edgar W. Butler,et al.  Some Sources of Interviewer Variance in Surveys , 1976 .

[11]  Martin R. Frankel,et al.  The Effect of Interviewer Characteristics and Expectations on Response , 1983 .

[12]  D. Katz.  DO INTERVIEWERS BIAS POLL RESULTS , 1942 .

[13]  M. Berk,et al.  Interviewer characteristics and performance on a complex health survey , 1988 .

[14]  M. Fendrich,et al.  The validity of drug use reports from juvenile arrestees. , 1994, The International journal of the addictions.

[15]  R. Groves,et al.  Gender Effects among Telephone Interviewers in a Survey of Economic Attitudes , 1985 .

[16]  T. Tilburg,et al.  Interviewer Effects in the Measurement of Personal Network Size A Nonexperimental Study , 1998 .

[17]  E. Kane,et al.  INTERVIEWER GENDER AND GENDER ATTITUDES , 1993 .

[18]  W. Axinn.  The influence of interviewer sex on responses to sensitive questions in Nepal , 1991 .

[19]  J. Jackson,et al.  BIAS IN TELEPHONE SURVEYS OF AFRICAN AMERICANS: THE IMPACT OF PERCEIVED RACE OF INTERVIEWER ON RESPONSES , 2002 .

[20]  L. Lueptow,et al.  Gender and response effects in telephone interviews about gender characteristics , 1990 .

[21]  D. Mechanic,et al.  The effect of interviewer characteristics on responses to a mental health interview. , 1981, Journal of health and social behavior.

[22]  T. Johnson,et al.  Gender interactions between interviewer and survey respondents: Issues of pornography and community standards , 1993 .

[23]  W. Darrow,et al.  Sex of interviewer, place of interview, and responses of homosexual men to sensitive questions , 1986, Archives of sexual behavior.

[24]  W. Aquilino.  INTERVIEW MODE EFFECTS IN SURVEYS OF DRUG AND ALCOHOL USE: A FIELD EXPERIMENT , 1994 .

[25]  D. Hedeker,et al.  MIXOR: a computer program for mixed-effects ordinal regression analysis. , 1996, Computer methods and programs in biomedicine.

[26]  Thomas M. Guterbock,et al.  RACE-OF-INTERVIEWER EFFECTS IN A PREELECTION POLL VIRGINIA 1989 , 1991 .

[27]  GENDER AND RESPONSE EFFECTS IN A PRE-ELECTION POLL: ILLINOIS 1992 , 2002 .

[28]  T. Johnson,et al.  Interviewer effects on self-reported substance use among homeless persons. , 1994, Addictive behaviors.

[29]  W. Dijkstra.  How interviewer variance can bias the results of research on interviewer effects , 1983 .

[30]  Gfroerer Jc,et al.  The feasibility of collecting drug abuse data by telephone. , 1991 .

[31]  J. Delamater.  Methodological Issues in the Study of Premarital Sexuality , 1974 .

[32]  Tom W. Smith,et al.  ASKING SENSITIVE QUESTIONS THE IMPACT OF DATA COLLECTION MODE, QUESTION FORMAT, AND QUESTION CONTEXT , 1996 .

[33]  T. Johnson,et al.  The Impact of Interviewer Characteristics on Drug Use Reporting by Male Juvenile Arrestees , 1999 .

[34]  P. Miller.  Review: Is Up Right? The National Household Survey on Drug Abuse , 1997 .

[35]  Howard Schuman,et al.  WHITE RESPONDENTS AND RACE-OF-INTERVIEWER EFFECTS , 1975 .

[36]  Robert M. Groves,et al.  Measuring and Explaining Interviewer Effects in Centralized Telephone Surveys , 1986 .

[37]  Michael Fendrich,et al.  DIMINISHED LIFETIME SUBSTANCE USE OVER TIME: AN INQUIRY INTO DIFFERENTIAL UNDERREPORTING , 1994 .

[38]  Thomas A. Gray,et al.  Correlates of Underreporting Recent Drug Use by Female Arrestees , 1999 .