Publikation: The Effectiveness of the Item Count Technique in Eliciting Valid Answers to Sensitive Question : An Evaluation in the Context of Self-Reported Delinquency
Dateien
Datum
Autor:innen
Herausgeber:innen
ISSN der Zeitschrift
Electronic ISSN
ISBN
Bibliografische Daten
Verlag
Schriftenreihe
Auflagebezeichnung
URI (zitierfähiger Link)
DOI (zitierfähiger Link)
Internationale Patentnummer
Link zur Lizenz
Angaben zur Forschungsförderung
Projekt
Open Access-Veröffentlichung
Sammlungen
Core Facility der Universität Konstanz
Titel in einer weiteren Sprache
Publikationstyp
Publikationsstatus
Erschienen in
Zusammenfassung
Surveys often contain sensitive questions, that is, questions about private, illegal, or socially undesirable behavior. When asked directly in standard survey modes, respondents tend to underreport these behaviors, yielding biased results. One method that promises more valid estimates than direct questioning (DQ) is the item count technique (ICT). In this paper, methodological benefits and disadvantages of the ICT, as compared to DQ, are empirically evaluated with regard to questions on self-reported delinquency. We present findings from a face-to-face survey of 552 respondents who had been convicted under criminal law prior to the survey. The results show that, first, subjective measures of survey quality such as trust in anonymity or willingness to respond are not affected positively by the ICT with the exception that interviewers feel less uncomfortable asking sensitive questions in ICT mode than in DQ mode. Second, all prevalence estimates of self-reported delinquent behaviors are significantly higher in ICT than in DQ mode. Third, a regression model on determinants of response behavior indicates that the effect of the ICT on response validity varies by gender. All in all, our results are in favor of the ICT. This technique is a promising alternative to other special questioning techniques such as the much more complicated randomized response technique (RRT).
Zusammenfassung in einer weiteren Sprache
Fachgebiet (DDC)
Schlagwörter
Konferenz
Rezension
Zitieren
ISO 690
WOLTER, Felix, Bastian LAIER, 2014. The Effectiveness of the Item Count Technique in Eliciting Valid Answers to Sensitive Question : An Evaluation in the Context of Self-Reported Delinquency. In: Survey Research Methods. 2014, 8(3), pp. 153-168. eISSN 1864-3361. Available under: doi: 10.18148/srm/2014.v8i3.5819BibTex
@article{Wolter2014Effec-47880, year={2014}, doi={10.18148/srm/2014.v8i3.5819}, title={The Effectiveness of the Item Count Technique in Eliciting Valid Answers to Sensitive Question : An Evaluation in the Context of Self-Reported Delinquency}, number={3}, volume={8}, journal={Survey Research Methods}, pages={153--168}, author={Wolter, Felix and Laier, Bastian} }
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/123456789/47880"> <dcterms:isPartOf rdf:resource="https://kops.uni-konstanz.de/server/rdf/resource/123456789/34"/> <dc:rights>terms-of-use</dc:rights> <foaf:homepage rdf:resource="http://localhost:8080/"/> <dc:contributor>Wolter, Felix</dc:contributor> <dc:language>eng</dc:language> <dc:creator>Laier, Bastian</dc:creator> <dcterms:abstract xml:lang="eng">Surveys often contain sensitive questions, that is, questions about private, illegal, or socially undesirable behavior. When asked directly in standard survey modes, respondents tend to underreport these behaviors, yielding biased results. One method that promises more valid estimates than direct questioning (DQ) is the item count technique (ICT). In this paper, methodological benefits and disadvantages of the ICT, as compared to DQ, are empirically evaluated with regard to questions on self-reported delinquency. We present findings from a face-to-face survey of 552 respondents who had been convicted under criminal law prior to the survey. The results show that, first, subjective measures of survey quality such as trust in anonymity or willingness to respond are not affected positively by the ICT with the exception that interviewers feel less uncomfortable asking sensitive questions in ICT mode than in DQ mode. Second, all prevalence estimates of self-reported delinquent behaviors are significantly higher in ICT than in DQ mode. Third, a regression model on determinants of response behavior indicates that the effect of the ICT on response validity varies by gender. All in all, our results are in favor of the ICT. This technique is a promising alternative to other special questioning techniques such as the much more complicated randomized response technique (RRT).</dcterms:abstract> <dcterms:rights rdf:resource="https://rightsstatements.org/page/InC/1.0/"/> <dc:contributor>Laier, Bastian</dc:contributor> <bibo:uri rdf:resource="https://kops.uni-konstanz.de/handle/123456789/47880"/> <dcterms:available rdf:datatype="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#dateTime">2019-12-06T14:36:23Z</dcterms:available> <dspace:hasBitstream rdf:resource="https://kops.uni-konstanz.de/bitstream/123456789/47880/3/Wolter_2-1b8ytkclizfey9.pdf"/> <dcterms:issued>2014</dcterms:issued> <dcterms:hasPart rdf:resource="https://kops.uni-konstanz.de/bitstream/123456789/47880/3/Wolter_2-1b8ytkclizfey9.pdf"/> <dc:creator>Wolter, Felix</dc:creator> <dc:date rdf:datatype="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#dateTime">2019-12-06T14:36:23Z</dc:date> <dspace:isPartOfCollection rdf:resource="https://kops.uni-konstanz.de/server/rdf/resource/123456789/34"/> <void:sparqlEndpoint rdf:resource="http://localhost/fuseki/dspace/sparql"/> <dcterms:title>The Effectiveness of the Item Count Technique in Eliciting Valid Answers to Sensitive Question : An Evaluation in the Context of Self-Reported Delinquency</dcterms:title> </rdf:Description> </rdf:RDF>