How Accurate Are Self-reports of Voluntary Association Memberships?

IF 6.5 2区 社会学 Q1 SOCIAL SCIENCES, MATHEMATICAL METHODS
Sociological Methods & Research Pub Date : 2021-05-01 Epub Date: 2018-10-03 DOI:10.1177/0049124118799384
Robyn Rap, Pamela Paxton
{"title":"How Accurate Are Self-reports of Voluntary Association Memberships?","authors":"Robyn Rap, Pamela Paxton","doi":"10.1177/0049124118799384","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Questions on voluntary association memberships have been used extensively in social scientific research for decades. Researchers generally assume that these respondent self-reports are accurate, but their measurement has never been assessed. Respondent characteristics are known to influence the accuracy of other self-report variables such as self-reported health, voting, or test scores. In this article, we investigate whether measurement error occurs in self-reports of voluntary association memberships. We use the 2004 General Social Survey (GSS) questions on voluntary associations, which include a novel resource: the actual organization names listed by respondents. We find that this widely used voluntary association classification scheme contains significant amounts of measurement error overall, especially within certain categories. Using a multilevel logistic regression, we predict accuracy of response nested within respondents and interviewers. We find that certain respondent characteristics, including some used in research on voluntary associations, influence respondent accuracy. Inaccurate and/or incorrect measurement will affect the statistics and conclusions drawn from the data on voluntary associations.</p>","PeriodicalId":21849,"journal":{"name":"Sociological Methods & Research","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":6.5000,"publicationDate":"2021-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11244701/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Sociological Methods & Research","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/0049124118799384","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2018/10/3 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"SOCIAL SCIENCES, MATHEMATICAL METHODS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Questions on voluntary association memberships have been used extensively in social scientific research for decades. Researchers generally assume that these respondent self-reports are accurate, but their measurement has never been assessed. Respondent characteristics are known to influence the accuracy of other self-report variables such as self-reported health, voting, or test scores. In this article, we investigate whether measurement error occurs in self-reports of voluntary association memberships. We use the 2004 General Social Survey (GSS) questions on voluntary associations, which include a novel resource: the actual organization names listed by respondents. We find that this widely used voluntary association classification scheme contains significant amounts of measurement error overall, especially within certain categories. Using a multilevel logistic regression, we predict accuracy of response nested within respondents and interviewers. We find that certain respondent characteristics, including some used in research on voluntary associations, influence respondent accuracy. Inaccurate and/or incorrect measurement will affect the statistics and conclusions drawn from the data on voluntary associations.

自愿协会会员的自我报告准确度如何?
几十年来,关于自愿协会成员资格的问题在社会科学研究中得到了广泛应用。研究人员通常认为这些受访者的自我报告是准确的,但他们的测量从未得到评估。众所周知,受访者的特征会影响其他自我报告变量的准确性,如自我报告的健康状况、投票或考试成绩。在这篇文章中,我们调查了自愿协会成员的自我报告中是否发生了测量误差。我们使用了2004年关于志愿协会的一般社会调查(GSS)问题,其中包括一个新的资源:受访者列出的实际组织名称。我们发现,这种广泛使用的自愿协会分类方案总体上包含大量的测量误差,尤其是在某些类别中。使用多水平逻辑回归,我们预测嵌套在受访者和访谈者中的回答的准确性。我们发现,某些受访者特征,包括一些在自愿协会研究中使用的特征,会影响受访者的准确性。不准确和/或不正确的测量将影响从自愿协会数据中得出的统计数据和结论。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
16.30
自引率
3.20%
发文量
40
期刊介绍: Sociological Methods & Research is a quarterly journal devoted to sociology as a cumulative empirical science. The objectives of SMR are multiple, but emphasis is placed on articles that advance the understanding of the field through systematic presentations that clarify methodological problems and assist in ordering the known facts in an area. Review articles will be published, particularly those that emphasize a critical analysis of the status of the arts, but original presentations that are broadly based and provide new research will also be published. Intrinsically, SMR is viewed as substantive journal but one that is highly focused on the assessment of the scientific status of sociology. The scope is broad and flexible, and authors are invited to correspond with the editors about the appropriateness of their articles.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信