Do Falsifiers Leave Traces? : Finding Recognizable Response Patterns in Interviewer Falsifications

dc.contributor.authorWalzenbach, Sandra
dc.date.accessioned2022-05-24T07:53:25Z
dc.date.available2022-05-24T07:53:25Z
dc.date.issued2021eng
dc.description.abstractFraud by interviewers is a ubiquitous threat to data quality in survey practice, whenever face-to-face surveys are conducted. Particularly if interviewers use stereotypes about re- spondents to fill in questionnaires, falsifications can limit the variety of possible answers, lead erroneously to significant correlations and distort survey results. In addition to external control mechanisms to detect fraud (such as postcards or time stamps) more recent research has started to also consider internal indicators (such as the number of missing values or open answers) as a monitoring strategy. This latter approach relies on ex-post statistical analyses and implicitly assumes that falsifiers apply rational behavioral strategies which result in detectable response patterns. This study examines to what extent fieldwork monitoring can benefit from such approaches, by empirically assess- ing how effective different indicators are at detecting known cases of fabrication. In contrast to most previous research, which often relies on laboratory fabrications, this study uses authentic cases of detected interviewer fraud from a survey on the fairness of earnings conducted in Germany. The main goal of this study is to examine to what extent the falsifiers’ attempts to produce unsuspicious data led to recognizable response patterns. For this purpose, we test a wide range of indicators that could potentially identify falsifica- tions: avoidance of extreme categories and open text-based answers, low rates of item-non- response, strategic use of filter questions to shorten the questionnaire and non-compliance of responses to numeric questions with Benford‘s Law. Furthermore, we compare authentic and fabricated interviews according to their values on a social desirability scale and report results from an innovative trick question that was especially designed to detect falsifiers.eng
dc.description.versionpublishedeng
dc.identifier.doi10.12758/mda.2021.02eng
dc.identifier.ppn1804267457
dc.identifier.urihttps://kops.uni-konstanz.de/handle/123456789/57631
dc.language.isoengeng
dc.rightsterms-of-use
dc.rights.urihttps://rightsstatements.org/page/InC/1.0/
dc.subjectinterviewer falsification, interviewer fraud, interviewer effects, response pat- terns, statistical methods, data qualityeng
dc.subject.ddc300eng
dc.titleDo Falsifiers Leave Traces? : Finding Recognizable Response Patterns in Interviewer Falsificationseng
dc.typeJOURNAL_ARTICLEeng
dspace.entity.typePublication
kops.citation.bibtex
@article{Walzenbach2021Falsi-57631,
  year={2021},
  doi={10.12758/mda.2021.02},
  title={Do Falsifiers Leave Traces? : Finding Recognizable Response Patterns in Interviewer Falsifications},
  number={2},
  volume={15},
  issn={1864-6956},
  journal={methods, data, analyses},
  pages={125--160},
  author={Walzenbach, Sandra}
}
kops.citation.iso690WALZENBACH, Sandra, 2021. Do Falsifiers Leave Traces? : Finding Recognizable Response Patterns in Interviewer Falsifications. In: methods, data, analyses. GESIS - Leibniz Institute for the Social Sciences. 2021, 15(2), S. 125-160. ISSN 1864-6956. Verfügbar unter: doi: 10.12758/mda.2021.02deu
kops.citation.iso690WALZENBACH, Sandra, 2021. Do Falsifiers Leave Traces? : Finding Recognizable Response Patterns in Interviewer Falsifications. In: methods, data, analyses. GESIS - Leibniz Institute for the Social Sciences. 2021, 15(2), pp. 125-160. ISSN 1864-6956. Available under: doi: 10.12758/mda.2021.02eng
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/123456789/57631">
    <dcterms:rights rdf:resource="https://rightsstatements.org/page/InC/1.0/"/>
    <dcterms:hasPart rdf:resource="https://kops.uni-konstanz.de/bitstream/123456789/57631/3/Walzenbach_2-es797vtcmc7e3.pdf"/>
    <dc:contributor>Walzenbach, Sandra</dc:contributor>
    <foaf:homepage rdf:resource="http://localhost:8080/"/>
    <dcterms:issued>2021</dcterms:issued>
    <dc:rights>terms-of-use</dc:rights>
    <dcterms:title>Do Falsifiers Leave Traces? : Finding Recognizable Response Patterns in Interviewer Falsifications</dcterms:title>
    <dc:language>eng</dc:language>
    <bibo:uri rdf:resource="https://kops.uni-konstanz.de/handle/123456789/57631"/>
    <dcterms:isPartOf rdf:resource="https://kops.uni-konstanz.de/server/rdf/resource/123456789/34"/>
    <dc:date rdf:datatype="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#dateTime">2022-05-24T07:53:25Z</dc:date>
    <dc:creator>Walzenbach, Sandra</dc:creator>
    <dspace:isPartOfCollection rdf:resource="https://kops.uni-konstanz.de/server/rdf/resource/123456789/34"/>
    <dcterms:available rdf:datatype="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#dateTime">2022-05-24T07:53:25Z</dcterms:available>
    <dcterms:abstract xml:lang="eng">Fraud by interviewers is a ubiquitous threat to data quality in survey practice, whenever face-to-face surveys are conducted. Particularly if interviewers use stereotypes about re- spondents to fill in questionnaires, falsifications can limit the variety of possible answers, lead erroneously to significant correlations and distort survey results. In addition to external control mechanisms to detect fraud (such as postcards or time stamps) more recent research has started to also consider internal indicators (such as the number of missing values or open answers) as a monitoring strategy. This latter approach relies on ex-post statistical analyses and implicitly assumes that falsifiers apply rational behavioral strategies which result in detectable response patterns. This study examines to what extent fieldwork monitoring can benefit from such approaches, by empirically assess- ing how effective different indicators are at detecting known cases of fabrication. In contrast to most previous research, which often relies on laboratory fabrications, this study uses authentic cases of detected interviewer fraud from a survey on the fairness of earnings conducted in Germany. The main goal of this study is to examine to what extent the falsifiers’ attempts to produce unsuspicious data led to recognizable response patterns. For this purpose, we test a wide range of indicators that could potentially identify falsifica- tions: avoidance of extreme categories and open text-based answers, low rates of item-non- response, strategic use of filter questions to shorten the questionnaire and non-compliance of responses to numeric questions with Benford‘s Law. Furthermore, we compare authentic and fabricated interviews according to their values on a social desirability scale and report results from an innovative trick question that was especially designed to detect falsifiers.</dcterms:abstract>
    <dspace:hasBitstream rdf:resource="https://kops.uni-konstanz.de/bitstream/123456789/57631/3/Walzenbach_2-es797vtcmc7e3.pdf"/>
    <void:sparqlEndpoint rdf:resource="http://localhost/fuseki/dspace/sparql"/>
  </rdf:Description>
</rdf:RDF>
kops.description.openAccessopenaccessgoldeng
kops.flag.isPeerReviewedtrueeng
kops.flag.knbibliographytrue
kops.identifier.nbnurn:nbn:de:bsz:352-2-es797vtcmc7e3
kops.sourcefieldmethods, data, analyses. GESIS - Leibniz Institute for the Social Sciences. 2021, <b>15</b>(2), S. 125-160. ISSN 1864-6956. Verfügbar unter: doi: 10.12758/mda.2021.02deu
kops.sourcefield.plainmethods, data, analyses. GESIS - Leibniz Institute for the Social Sciences. 2021, 15(2), S. 125-160. ISSN 1864-6956. Verfügbar unter: doi: 10.12758/mda.2021.02deu
kops.sourcefield.plainmethods, data, analyses. GESIS - Leibniz Institute for the Social Sciences. 2021, 15(2), pp. 125-160. ISSN 1864-6956. Available under: doi: 10.12758/mda.2021.02eng
relation.isAuthorOfPublication9b65e498-88f9-4177-93cb-6cd07cd09f77
relation.isAuthorOfPublication.latestForDiscovery9b65e498-88f9-4177-93cb-6cd07cd09f77
source.bibliographicInfo.fromPage125eng
source.bibliographicInfo.issue2eng
source.bibliographicInfo.toPage160eng
source.bibliographicInfo.volume15eng
source.identifier.issn1864-6956eng
source.periodicalTitlemethods, data, analyseseng
source.publisherGESIS - Leibniz Institute for the Social Scienceseng

Dateien

Originalbündel

Gerade angezeigt 1 - 1 von 1
Vorschaubild nicht verfügbar
Name:
Walzenbach_2-es797vtcmc7e3.pdf
Größe:
909.47 KB
Format:
Adobe Portable Document Format
Beschreibung:
Walzenbach_2-es797vtcmc7e3.pdf
Walzenbach_2-es797vtcmc7e3.pdfGröße: 909.47 KBDownloads: 278

Lizenzbündel

Gerade angezeigt 1 - 1 von 1
Vorschaubild nicht verfügbar
Name:
license.txt
Größe:
3.96 KB
Format:
Item-specific license agreed upon to submission
Beschreibung:
license.txt
license.txtGröße: 3.96 KBDownloads: 0