SSOAR Logo
    • Deutsch
    • English
  • Deutsch 
    • Deutsch
    • English
  • Einloggen
SSOAR ▼
  • Home
  • Über SSOAR
  • Leitlinien
  • Veröffentlichen auf SSOAR
  • Kooperieren mit SSOAR
    • Kooperationsmodelle
    • Ablieferungswege und Formate
    • Projekte
  • Kooperationspartner
    • Informationen zu Kooperationspartnern
  • Informationen
    • Möglichkeiten für den Grünen Weg
    • Vergabe von Nutzungslizenzen
    • Informationsmaterial zum Download
  • Betriebskonzept
Browsen und suchen Dokument hinzufügen OAI-PMH-Schnittstelle
JavaScript is disabled for your browser. Some features of this site may not work without it.

Download PDF
Volltext herunterladen

(externe Quelle)

Zitationshinweis

Bitte beziehen Sie sich beim Zitieren dieses Dokumentes immer auf folgenden Persistent Identifier (PID):
https://doi.org/10.18148/srm/2014.v8i3.5819

Export für Ihre Literaturverwaltung

Bibtex-Export
Endnote-Export

Statistiken anzeigen
Weiterempfehlen
  • Share via E-Mail E-Mail
  • Share via Facebook Facebook
  • Share via Bluesky Bluesky
  • Share via Reddit reddit
  • Share via Linkedin LinkedIn
  • Share via XING XING

The effectiveness of the item count technique in eliciting valid answers to sensitive questions: an evaluation in the context of self-reported delinquency

Die Effektivität der Item-Zähl-Technik bei der Gewinnung valider Antworten auf sensitive Fragen: eine Evaluation im Kontext selbst berichteter Delinquenz
[Zeitschriftenartikel]

Wolter, Felix
Laier, Bastian

Abstract

"Surveys often contain sensitive questions, that is, questions about private, illegal, or socially undesirable behavior. When asked directly in standard survey modes, respondents tend to underreport these behaviors, yielding biased results. One method that promises more valid estimates than direct q... mehr

"Surveys often contain sensitive questions, that is, questions about private, illegal, or socially undesirable behavior. When asked directly in standard survey modes, respondents tend to underreport these behaviors, yielding biased results. One method that promises more valid estimates than direct questioning (DQ) is the item count technique (ICT). In this paper, methodological benefits and disadvantages of the ICT, as compared to DQ, are empirically evaluated with regard to questions on self-reported delinquency. We present findings from a face-to-face survey of 552 respondents who had been convicted under criminal law prior to the survey. The results show that, first, subjective measures of survey quality such as trust in anonymity or willingness to respond are not affected positively by the ICT with the exception that interviewers feel less uncomfortable asking sensitive questions in ICT mode than in DQ mode. Second, all prevalence estimates of self-reported delinquent behaviors are significantly higher in ICT than in DQ mode. Third, a regression model on determinants of response behavior indicates that the effect of the ICT on response validity varies by gender. All in all, our results are in favor of the ICT. This technique is a promising alternative to other special questioning techniques such as the much more complicated randomized response technique (RRT)." (author's abstract)... weniger

Thesaurusschlagwörter
Antwortverhalten; Delinquenz

Klassifikation
Erhebungstechniken und Analysetechniken der Sozialwissenschaften

Sprache Dokument
Englisch

Publikationsjahr
2014

Seitenangabe
S. 153-168

Zeitschriftentitel
Survey Research Methods, 8 (2014) 3

ISSN
1864-3361

Status
Veröffentlichungsversion; begutachtet (peer reviewed)

Lizenz
Deposit Licence - Keine Weiterverbreitung, keine Bearbeitung


GESIS LogoDFG LogoOpen Access Logo
Home  |  Impressum  |  Betriebskonzept  |  Datenschutzerklärung
© 2007 - 2025 Social Science Open Access Repository (SSOAR).
Based on DSpace, Copyright (c) 2002-2022, DuraSpace. All rights reserved.
 

 


GESIS LogoDFG LogoOpen Access Logo
Home  |  Impressum  |  Betriebskonzept  |  Datenschutzerklärung
© 2007 - 2025 Social Science Open Access Repository (SSOAR).
Based on DSpace, Copyright (c) 2002-2022, DuraSpace. All rights reserved.