Joanne Pascale QUEST Conference Ottawa Canada April 26 2007 Outline Dependent interviewing Research questions addressed with behavior coding Methods Findings Summary and Recommendations ID: 314546
Download Presentation The PPT/PDF document "Using Behavior Coding to Evaluate the Ef..." is the property of its rightful owner. Permission is granted to download and print the materials on this web site for personal, non-commercial use only, and to display it on your personal computer provided you do not modify the materials and that you retain all copyright notices contained in the materials. By downloading content from our website, you accept the terms of this agreement.
Slide1
Using Behavior Coding to Evaluate the Effectiveness of Dependent Interviewing
Joanne PascaleQUEST ConferenceOttawa, CanadaApril 26, 2007
Slide2
OutlineDependent interviewingResearch questions addressed with behavior codingMethodsFindingsSummary and RecommendationsSlide3
Dependent Interviewing (DI)Used in longitudinal studiesCarries reports from one wave into the next interview waveE.g.: ‘Last time you said you were receiving benefit X. Are you still receiving benefit X?’Slide4
Purpose of DIPotential for smoother, smarter, more efficient interviewLiterature demonstrates:Reduced burdenReduced item non-responseReduced seam biasRespondents want and expect itSlide5
Research QuestionsHow is DI being implemented in the field:Do interviews read questions as worded?Do respondents affirm or dispute the fed-forward data from prior wave?Does this vary by ‘style’ of DI?Slide6
Methods: The ELSA StudyEnglish Longitudinal Study on Aging (ELSA)Panel study of 50+ begun in 2002Follow-ups every 2 yearsCAPI face-to-faceSlide7
Methods: The ELSA PilotVehicle for DI test: pilot of Wave 3January, 20064-week field periodRecorded onto laptops using CARI17 interviewers104 pilot interviewsSlide8
Methods: DI Topics and Styles3 different topic areas:DemographicsHealth conditionsEye (e.g. glaucoma)Cardio-vascular (e.g. high blood pressure)Chronic (e.g. arthritis)Vehicle ownership5 different styles of DISlide9
Demographics Item Wording1. Does John still live here?2. Can I just check, is John’s date of birth January 1, 1960?3. Our records show that when we last interviewed you, you had a child called Billy, whose date of birth is July 1, 2005. Are these details correct?Slide10
Health Item Wording4a. Our records show that when we last interviewed you in [DATE], you said that you had [EYE CONDITION].4b. Do you still have [EYE CONDITION]?[same routine for CVD and chronic conditions]Slide11
Vehicle Item Wording5. At the time of last interview, you or someone in your household owned [VEHICLE]. Is that vehicle still owned by you or someone in your household?Slide12
Behavior CodingListened to several pilot tapes to develop code frameFirst-level exchange sufficientDeveloped Interviewer, Respondent and Outcome codesSlide13
Interviewer CodesRead as worded/slight change
Major change
FF statement became a question
FF question became a statement
Other major change
Omitted
Inaudible Interviewer/OtherSlide14
Respondent CodesAdequate
Affirmed FF item
Disputed FF item
Inadequate Answer/Elaboration
Clarification
Inaudible Respondent/OtherSlide15
Demographics Findings
Interviewer Behavior
Respondent Behavior
Exact/slight change
Q read as statement
Q omitted
Adequate Affirmed
Adequate
Disputed
Does NAME still live here?
40
33
18
81
1
Can I check, is NAMES’s DOB?
57
37
1
91
0
Our records show child’s name, DOB. Details correct?
79
8
0
89
5Slide16
Health Findings
Interviewer Behavior
R Behavior
Exact/slt change
S read as Q
Q read as S
Omitted
Adequate Affirmed
Adequate Disputed
Last time you reported EYE cond
62
38
--
0
62
10
Do you still?
63
--
16
16
--
--
Last time you reported CVS cond
63
20
--
0
87
5
Do you still?
76
--
3
13
--
--
Last time you reported CHRONIC cond
41
34
--
5
85
4
Do you still?
61
--
14
18
--
--Slide17
Vehicle Findings
Interviewer Behavior
Respondent Behavior
Exact/slight change
Q read as S
Omitted
Adequate Affirmed
Adequate Disputed
Last time you owned …vehicle. Still own?
82
8
4
74
6Slide18
Summary: InterviewersQs read as worded: 40-82%Non-standard reading varied:Demographics & vehicle: questions turned into statements or omittedHealth: statements of what was reported last time were turned into questions; question “is that still” omitted Slide19
Summary: RespondentsAdequate answer: 72-94%Disputed fed-forward data: 0-10%Confirmed prior wave report but said no longer the caseDenied prior wave reportDisagreed with details of prior wave reportSlide20
RecommendationsAvoid simple statements of prior wave data For topics unlikely to change over time (e.g.: DOB) avoid re-asking; verify accuracy of first report Style of DI needs to be tailored to itemPrior wave data could be challenged; need to allow for corrections