Survey Consent to Administrative Data Linkage : Five Experiments on Wording and Format

dc.contributor.authorJäckle, Annette
dc.contributor.authorBurton, Jonathan
dc.contributor.authorCouper, Mick P.
dc.contributor.authorCrossley, Thomas F.
dc.contributor.authorWalzenbach, Sandra
dc.date.accessioned2024-01-26T06:39:43Z
dc.date.available2024-01-26T06:39:43Z
dc.date.issued2024-11-01
dc.description.abstractTo maximize the value of the data while minimizing respondent burden, survey data are increasingly linked to administrative records. Record linkage often requires the informed consent of survey respondents and failure to obtain consent reduces sample size and may lead to selection bias. Relatively little is known about how best to word and format consent requests in surveys. We conducted a series of experiments in a probability household panel and an online access panel to understand how various features of the design of the consent request can affect informed consent. We experimentally varied: (i) the readability of the consent request, (ii) placement of the consent request in the survey, (iii) consent as default versus the standard opt-in consent question, (iv) offering additional information, and (v) a priming treatment focusing on trust in the data holder. For each experiment, we examine the effects of the treatments on consent rates, objective understanding of the consent request (measured with knowledge test questions), subjective understanding (how well the respondent felt they understood the request), confidence in their decision, response times, and whether they read any of the additional information materials. We find that the default wording and offering additional information do not increase consent rates. Improving the readability of the consent question increases objective understanding but does not increase the consent rate. However, asking for consent early in the survey and priming respondents to consider their trust in the administrative data holder both increase consent rates without negatively affecting understanding of the request.
dc.description.versionpublisheddeu
dc.identifier.doi10.1093/jssam/smad019
dc.identifier.ppn1910936308
dc.identifier.urihttps://kops.uni-konstanz.de/handle/123456789/69173
dc.language.isoeng
dc.rightsAttribution 4.0 International
dc.rights.urihttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
dc.subjectAdministrative records
dc.subjectInformed consent
dc.subjectQuestion design
dc.subjectTrust
dc.subjectUnderstanding
dc.subject.ddc300
dc.titleSurvey Consent to Administrative Data Linkage : Five Experiments on Wording and Formateng
dc.typeJOURNAL_ARTICLE
dspace.entity.typePublication
kops.citation.bibtex
@article{Jackle2024-11-01Surve-69173,
  year={2024},
  doi={10.1093/jssam/smad019},
  title={Survey Consent to Administrative Data Linkage : Five Experiments on Wording and Format},
  number={5},
  volume={12},
  issn={2325-0984},
  journal={Journal of Survey Statistics and Methodology},
  pages={1174--1199},
  author={Jäckle, Annette and Burton, Jonathan and Couper, Mick P. and Crossley, Thomas F. and Walzenbach, Sandra}
}
kops.citation.iso690JÄCKLE, Annette, Jonathan BURTON, Mick P. COUPER, Thomas F. CROSSLEY, Sandra WALZENBACH, 2024. Survey Consent to Administrative Data Linkage : Five Experiments on Wording and Format. In: Journal of Survey Statistics and Methodology. Oxford University Press. 2024, 12(5), S. 1174-1199. ISSN 2325-0984. eISSN 2325-0992. Verfügbar unter: doi: 10.1093/jssam/smad019deu
kops.citation.iso690JÄCKLE, Annette, Jonathan BURTON, Mick P. COUPER, Thomas F. CROSSLEY, Sandra WALZENBACH, 2024. Survey Consent to Administrative Data Linkage : Five Experiments on Wording and Format. In: Journal of Survey Statistics and Methodology. Oxford University Press. 2024, 12(5), pp. 1174-1199. ISSN 2325-0984. eISSN 2325-0992. Available under: doi: 10.1093/jssam/smad019eng
kops.citation.rdf
<rdf:RDF
    xmlns:dcterms="http://purl.org/dc/terms/"
    xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
    xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#"
    xmlns:bibo="http://purl.org/ontology/bibo/"
    xmlns:dspace="http://digital-repositories.org/ontologies/dspace/0.1.0#"
    xmlns:foaf="http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/"
    xmlns:void="http://rdfs.org/ns/void#"
    xmlns:xsd="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#" > 
  <rdf:Description rdf:about="https://kops.uni-konstanz.de/server/rdf/resource/123456789/69173">
    <dcterms:isPartOf rdf:resource="https://kops.uni-konstanz.de/server/rdf/resource/123456789/34"/>
    <dcterms:available rdf:datatype="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#dateTime">2024-01-26T06:39:43Z</dcterms:available>
    <bibo:uri rdf:resource="https://kops.uni-konstanz.de/handle/123456789/69173"/>
    <dspace:isPartOfCollection rdf:resource="https://kops.uni-konstanz.de/server/rdf/resource/123456789/34"/>
    <dc:creator>Jäckle, Annette</dc:creator>
    <dspace:hasBitstream rdf:resource="https://kops.uni-konstanz.de/bitstream/123456789/69173/1/Jaeckle_2-1pb7q6zbvz62k0.pdf"/>
    <dcterms:issued>2024-11-01</dcterms:issued>
    <dc:contributor>Burton, Jonathan</dc:contributor>
    <dc:contributor>Crossley, Thomas F.</dc:contributor>
    <dcterms:title>Survey Consent to Administrative Data Linkage : Five Experiments on Wording and Format</dcterms:title>
    <dcterms:hasPart rdf:resource="https://kops.uni-konstanz.de/bitstream/123456789/69173/1/Jaeckle_2-1pb7q6zbvz62k0.pdf"/>
    <dcterms:rights rdf:resource="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/"/>
    <dc:creator>Couper, Mick P.</dc:creator>
    <dc:creator>Walzenbach, Sandra</dc:creator>
    <dc:contributor>Jäckle, Annette</dc:contributor>
    <dc:creator>Burton, Jonathan</dc:creator>
    <dc:date rdf:datatype="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#dateTime">2024-01-26T06:39:43Z</dc:date>
    <dc:contributor>Couper, Mick P.</dc:contributor>
    <dc:language>eng</dc:language>
    <dc:contributor>Walzenbach, Sandra</dc:contributor>
    <dcterms:abstract>To maximize the value of the data while minimizing respondent burden, survey data are increasingly linked to administrative records. Record linkage often requires the informed consent of survey respondents and failure to obtain consent reduces sample size and may lead to selection bias. Relatively little is known about how best to word and format consent requests in surveys. We conducted a series of experiments in a probability household panel and an online access panel to understand how various features of the design of the consent request can affect informed consent. We experimentally varied: (i) the readability of the consent request, (ii) placement of the consent request in the survey, (iii) consent as default versus the standard opt-in consent question, (iv) offering additional information, and (v) a priming treatment focusing on trust in the data holder. For each experiment, we examine the effects of the treatments on consent rates, objective understanding of the consent request (measured with knowledge test questions), subjective understanding (how well the respondent felt they understood the request), confidence in their decision, response times, and whether they read any of the additional information materials. We find that the default wording and offering additional information do not increase consent rates. Improving the readability of the consent question increases objective understanding but does not increase the consent rate. However, asking for consent early in the survey and priming respondents to consider their trust in the administrative data holder both increase consent rates without negatively affecting understanding of the request.</dcterms:abstract>
    <void:sparqlEndpoint rdf:resource="http://localhost/fuseki/dspace/sparql"/>
    <foaf:homepage rdf:resource="http://localhost:8080/"/>
    <dc:rights>Attribution 4.0 International</dc:rights>
    <dc:creator>Crossley, Thomas F.</dc:creator>
  </rdf:Description>
</rdf:RDF>
kops.description.openAccessopenaccesshybrid
kops.flag.isPeerReviewedunknown
kops.flag.knbibliographytrue
kops.identifier.nbnurn:nbn:de:bsz:352-2-1pb7q6zbvz62k0
kops.sourcefieldJournal of Survey Statistics and Methodology. Oxford University Press. 2024, <b>12</b>(5), S. 1174-1199. ISSN 2325-0984. eISSN 2325-0992. Verfügbar unter: doi: 10.1093/jssam/smad019deu
kops.sourcefield.plainJournal of Survey Statistics and Methodology. Oxford University Press. 2024, 12(5), S. 1174-1199. ISSN 2325-0984. eISSN 2325-0992. Verfügbar unter: doi: 10.1093/jssam/smad019deu
kops.sourcefield.plainJournal of Survey Statistics and Methodology. Oxford University Press. 2024, 12(5), pp. 1174-1199. ISSN 2325-0984. eISSN 2325-0992. Available under: doi: 10.1093/jssam/smad019eng
relation.isAuthorOfPublicationa2719135-68cb-414f-bd69-7fe414662a6c
relation.isAuthorOfPublication9b65e498-88f9-4177-93cb-6cd07cd09f77
relation.isAuthorOfPublication.latestForDiscoverya2719135-68cb-414f-bd69-7fe414662a6c
source.bibliographicInfo.fromPage1174
source.bibliographicInfo.issue5
source.bibliographicInfo.toPage1199
source.bibliographicInfo.volume12
source.identifier.eissn2325-0992
source.identifier.issn2325-0984
source.periodicalTitleJournal of Survey Statistics and Methodology
source.publisherOxford University Press

Dateien

Originalbündel

Gerade angezeigt 1 - 1 von 1
Vorschaubild nicht verfügbar
Name:
Jaeckle_2-1pb7q6zbvz62k0.pdf
Größe:
433.79 KB
Format:
Adobe Portable Document Format
Jaeckle_2-1pb7q6zbvz62k0.pdf
Jaeckle_2-1pb7q6zbvz62k0.pdfGröße: 433.79 KBDownloads: 65