访谈者和被访者的互动和时间日记研究的质量评估。

Vicki A Freedman, Jessica Broome, Frederick Conrad, Jennifer C Cornman
{"title":"访谈者和被访者的互动和时间日记研究的质量评估。","authors":"Vicki A Freedman,&nbsp;Jessica Broome,&nbsp;Frederick Conrad,&nbsp;Jennifer C Cornman","doi":"10.13085/eIJTUR.10.1.55-75","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Systematic investigations of the cognitive challenges in completing time diaries and measures of quality for such interviews have been lacking. To fill this gap, we analyze respondent and interviewer behaviors and interviewer-provided observations about diary quality for a computer-assisted telephone-administered time diary supplement to the U.S. Panel Study of Income Dynamics. We find that 93%-96% of sequences result in a codable answer and interviewers rarely assist respondents with comprehension. Questions about what the respondent did next and for how long appear more challenging than follow-up descriptors. Long sequences do not necessarily signal comprehension problems, but often involve interviewer utterances designed to promote conversational flow. A 6-item diary quality scale appropriately reflects respondents' difficulties and interviewers' assistance with comprehension, but is not correlated with conversational flow. Discussion focuses on practical recommendations for time diary studies and future research.</p>","PeriodicalId":90157,"journal":{"name":"Electronic international journal of time use research","volume":"10 1","pages":"55-75"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2013-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3981108/pdf/nihms-554463.pdf","citationCount":"8","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Interviewer and Respondent Interactions and Quality Assessments in a Time Diary Study.\",\"authors\":\"Vicki A Freedman,&nbsp;Jessica Broome,&nbsp;Frederick Conrad,&nbsp;Jennifer C Cornman\",\"doi\":\"10.13085/eIJTUR.10.1.55-75\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Systematic investigations of the cognitive challenges in completing time diaries and measures of quality for such interviews have been lacking. To fill this gap, we analyze respondent and interviewer behaviors and interviewer-provided observations about diary quality for a computer-assisted telephone-administered time diary supplement to the U.S. Panel Study of Income Dynamics. We find that 93%-96% of sequences result in a codable answer and interviewers rarely assist respondents with comprehension. Questions about what the respondent did next and for how long appear more challenging than follow-up descriptors. Long sequences do not necessarily signal comprehension problems, but often involve interviewer utterances designed to promote conversational flow. A 6-item diary quality scale appropriately reflects respondents' difficulties and interviewers' assistance with comprehension, but is not correlated with conversational flow. Discussion focuses on practical recommendations for time diary studies and future research.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":90157,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Electronic international journal of time use research\",\"volume\":\"10 1\",\"pages\":\"55-75\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2013-11-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3981108/pdf/nihms-554463.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"8\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Electronic international journal of time use research\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.13085/eIJTUR.10.1.55-75\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Electronic international journal of time use research","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.13085/eIJTUR.10.1.55-75","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 8

摘要

对完成时间日记的认知挑战的系统调查和此类访谈的质量措施一直缺乏。为了填补这一空白,我们分析了受访者和采访者的行为,以及采访者提供的关于日记质量的观察,这些观察是为美国收入动态小组研究的计算机辅助电话管理的时间日记增刊提供的。我们发现93%-96%的序列结果是一个可编码的答案,面试官很少帮助受访者理解。关于被调查者接下来做了什么以及持续了多久的问题似乎比后续描述更具挑战性。长序列不一定表示理解问题,但通常涉及面试官为促进对话流畅而设计的话语。6项日记质量量表适当地反映了受访者的困难和采访者在理解方面的帮助,但与会话流无关。讨论的重点是时间日记研究和未来研究的实用建议。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

Interviewer and Respondent Interactions and Quality Assessments in a Time Diary Study.

Interviewer and Respondent Interactions and Quality Assessments in a Time Diary Study.

Interviewer and Respondent Interactions and Quality Assessments in a Time Diary Study.

Interviewer and Respondent Interactions and Quality Assessments in a Time Diary Study.

Systematic investigations of the cognitive challenges in completing time diaries and measures of quality for such interviews have been lacking. To fill this gap, we analyze respondent and interviewer behaviors and interviewer-provided observations about diary quality for a computer-assisted telephone-administered time diary supplement to the U.S. Panel Study of Income Dynamics. We find that 93%-96% of sequences result in a codable answer and interviewers rarely assist respondents with comprehension. Questions about what the respondent did next and for how long appear more challenging than follow-up descriptors. Long sequences do not necessarily signal comprehension problems, but often involve interviewer utterances designed to promote conversational flow. A 6-item diary quality scale appropriately reflects respondents' difficulties and interviewers' assistance with comprehension, but is not correlated with conversational flow. Discussion focuses on practical recommendations for time diary studies and future research.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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