Skip Navigation

This Article
Right arrow Summary
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by SINGER, E.
Right arrow Articles by GLASSMAN, M. B.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

Public Opinion Quarterly 47:68-83 (1983)
© 1983 American Association for Public Opinion Research

The Effect of Interviewer Characteristics and Expectations on Response

ELEANOR SINGER, MARTIN R. FRANKEL and MARC B. GLASSMAN

Eleanor Singer is a Senior Research Associate at the Center for the Social Sciences. Martin R. Frankel is Professor of Statistics at Baruch College, CUNY. Marc B. Glassman is an independent statistical consultant in New York City. The authors wish to thank Ed Blair, Charles F. Cannell, Howard Schuman, and Seymour Sudman for reading and commenting on an earlier draft of the paper. The research was made possible by grant SES-78-19797 to the senior author.

This study reports on two sets of findings related to interviewer effects, derived from a national RDD sample of the adult population. The first of these concerns the effect of interviewer characteristics and expectations on overall cooperation rates; the second, the effect of interviewer characteristics and expectations on item nonresponse and response quality. We found that interviewers' age, the size of the interviewing assignment, and interviewers' expectations all had a strong effect on overall cooperation rates; the relation of experience to response rate was curvilinear in this sample. Age and education have consistent but statistically insignificant effects on item nonresponse. The effect of interviewers' expectations on responses within the interview resembles that in earlier studies, but is less pronounced and less consistent.


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
Health Educ ResHome page
R. E. Davis, M. P. Couper, N. K. Janz, C. H. Caldwell, and K. Resnicow
Interviewer effects in public health surveys
Health Educ. Res., September 17, 2009; (2009) cyp046v1.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Journal of Research in NursingHome page
R. Harris, D. Kelly, J. A Hunt, H. Plant, K. Kelley, A. Richardson, and J. Sitzia
Accessing elite nurses for research: reflections on the theoretical and practical issues of telephone interviewing
Journal of Research in Nursing, May 1, 2008; 13(3): 236 - 248.
[Abstract] [PDF]


Home page
Qualitative ResearchHome page
M. Thomas, M. Bloor, and J. Frankland
The process of sample recruitment: an ethnostatistical perspective
Qualitative Research, November 1, 2007; 7(4): 429 - 446.
[Abstract] [PDF]


Home page
Public Opin QHome page
K. Olson and A. Peytchev
Effect of Interviewer Experience on Interview Pace and Interviewer Attitudes
Public Opin Q, June 7, 2007; (2007) nfm007v1.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Field MethodsHome page
M. W. Link
Predicting the Persistence and Performance of Newly Recruited Telephone Interviewers
Field Methods, August 1, 2006; 18(3): 305 - 320.
[Abstract] [PDF]


Home page
Eval RevHome page
B. Bozeman
The Internet's Impact on Policy Evaluation: Information Compression and Credibility
Eval Rev, April 1, 2004; 28(2): 156 - 174.
[Abstract] [PDF]


Home page
Am J EpidemiolHome page
A.-M. N. Andersen and J. Olsen
Do Interviewers' Health Beliefs and Habits Modify Responses to Sensitive Questions? A Study using Data Collected from Pregnant Women by Means of Computer-assisted Telephone Interviews
Am. J. Epidemiol., January 1, 2002; 155(1): 95 - 100.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Sociological Methods ResearchHome page
J. PICKERY, G. LOOSVELDT, and A. CARTON
The Effects of Interviewer and Respondent Characteristics on Response Behavior in Panel Surveys: A Multilevel Approach
Sociological Methods Research, May 1, 2001; 29(4): 509 - 523.
[Abstract] [PDF]


Home page
Sociological Methods ResearchHome page
H. HOUTKOOP-STEENSTRA and H. van den BERGH
Effects of Introductions in Large-Scale Telephone Survey Interviews
Sociological Methods Research, February 1, 2000; 28(3): 281 - 300.
[Abstract] [PDF]


Home page
Eval RevHome page
J. A. Parsons, T. P. Johnson, R. B. Warnecke, and A. Kaluzny
The Effect of Interviewer Characteristics On Gatekeeper Resistance in Surveys of Elite Populations
Eval Rev, April 1, 1993; 17(2): 131 - 143.
[Abstract] [PDF]


Home page
Eval RevHome page
G. A. Johanson, C. J. Gips, and C. E. Rich
"If You Can'T Say Something Nice": A Variation on the Social Desirability Response Set
Eval Rev, February 1, 1993; 17(1): 116 - 122.
[Abstract] [PDF]


Home page
Eval Health ProfHome page
R. J. Dworkin
Interviewer Preferences for Respondent Groups
Eval Health Prof, September 1, 1989; 12(3): 282 - 299.
[Abstract] [PDF]



Disclaimer: Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.