Celine Wuyts

The effect of sociodemographic (mis)match between interviewers and respondents on unit and item nonresponse in Belgium

Interviewer characteristics affect nonresponse and measurement errors in face-to-face surveys. Some studies have shown that mismatched sociodemographic characteristics - for example gender - affect peoples behavior when interacting with an interviewer at the door and during the survey interview, resulting in more nonresponse. We investigate the effect of sociodemographic (mis)matching on nonresponse in two successive rounds of the European Social Survey in Belgium. As such, we replicate the analyses of the effect of (mis)matching gender and age on unit nonresponse on the one hand, and of gender, age and education level (mis)matching on item nonresponse on the other hand. Recurring effects of sociodemographic (mis)match are found for both unit and item nonresponse.

Interviewer variance and its effects on estimates

Purpose In survey methodology, it is well-known that interviewers can have an impact on the registered answers. This paper aims to focus on one type of interviewer effect that arises from the differences between interviewers in the systematic effects of each interviewer on the answers. In the first case, the authors evaluate interviewer effects on the measurement of alcohol consumption in European countries. The second case is about the interviewer effects on the respondents’ tendency to (non)differentiate their responses and the consequences of this response style for the correlation between variables. Design/methodology/approach The interviewer effects are evaluated by means of interviewer variance analysis. Because respondents are nested within interviewers, we can specify a two- or three-level random intercept model to calculate the proportion of variance explained by the interviewers. Data from the seventh round of the European Social Survey are used. Findings The results in the first case show that the substantive conclusions about the effect of gender and education on the alcohol measures continue to hold when interviewer effects are taken into account. The results of the second case make clear that interviewer effects on attitudinal questions are considerable. There is also a significant effect of the interviewers on the degree that respondents differentiate their responses. The results also illustrate that correlations between attitudinal variables are influenced. This also implies that the results of statistical procedures using a correlation or covariance matrix can be strongly influenced by the tendency to (non)differentiate and the interviewers’ impact on this tendency. Originality/value The results clearly demonstrate that there are considerable differences between countries concerning the impact of the interviewers on substantive variables. Cross-national differences are striking and the importance and necessity to evaluate interviewer effects in a cross-national survey becomes clear.

The Interviewer in the Respondent’s Shoes What Can We Learn from the Way Interviewers Answer Survey Questions?

Previous research shows that interviewers to some extent fail to expend the effort that is needed to collect high-quality survey data. We extend the idea of interviewer satisficing to a related task, in which the interviewers themselves answer survey questions. We hypothesize that interviewers who self-administer the questionnaire in a careless manner will also not apply themselves fully to the task of administering survey interviews. Based on interviewer and respondent data from the sixth round of the European Social Survey in Belgium, we find support for some of the hypothesized associations between (suboptimal) response characteristics of interviewers in the “task as respondent” and the same (suboptimal) response characteristics recorded for their respondents, specifically with regard to interview speed, multiple response, and item nonresponse to the household income question.