Download full text
(1.143Mb)
Citation Suggestion
Please use the following Persistent Identifier (PID) to cite this document:
https://nbn-resolving.org/urn:nbn:de:0168-ssoar-121738
Exports for your reference manager
Untersuchungen zur Ursache unterschiedlicher Ergebnisse sehr ähnlicher Viktimisierungssurveys
An investigation of the discrepancy in the results of nearly identical victimization surveys
[journal article]
Abstract "Zwei 1997 in der Bundesrepublik Deutschland erhobene sehr ähnliche Viktimisierungssurveys (gleiche Grundgesamtheit, gleiches Institut, fast gleiches Design, teilweise identische Interviewerstäbe, identische Operationalisierung etc.) zeigten so deutliche Unterschiede in den geschätzten Opferraten, d... view more
"Zwei 1997 in der Bundesrepublik Deutschland erhobene sehr ähnliche Viktimisierungssurveys (gleiche Grundgesamtheit, gleiches Institut, fast gleiches Design, teilweise identische Interviewerstäbe, identische Operationalisierung etc.) zeigten so deutliche Unterschiede in den geschätzten Opferraten, dass selbst um Klumpeneffekte und Designgewichte korrigierte Konfidenzintervalle signifikante Unterschiede zwischen den Surveys indizieren. Zur Erklärung dieser Unterschiede werden eine Reihe möglicher methodischer Details der beiden Surveys kritisch diskutiert und in ihren Konsequenzen quantitativ abgeschätzt. Als vermutliche Ursache für die unterschiedlichen Survey-Ergebnisse werden die Rahmenbedingungen der Arbeit der Interviewer identifiziert. Das Ergebnis zeigt eindringlich die Wichtigkeit solcher kaum je dokumentierten und noch seltener kontrollierten Details der Feldarbeit bei sozialwissenschaftlichen Erhebungen." (Autorenreferat)... view less
"Two very similar surveys on victimization were conducted in 1997. Although the target population, design, operationalization, field organization and part of the interviewer staff were nearly identical, the resulting estimates of victimization status were remarkably different. Neither correction for... view more
"Two very similar surveys on victimization were conducted in 1997. Although the target population, design, operationalization, field organization and part of the interviewer staff were nearly identical, the resulting estimates of victimization status were remarkably different. Neither correction for design effects nor the use of appropriate weighting eliminated this statistically significant difference. Several methodological details of the surveys are considered as explanations. Quantitative estimates of their possible effects are given. The interviewer working conditions are identified as the most likely source of the discrepancy. This result emphasizes the importance of these seldom documented and even more rarely controlled fieldwork details." (author's abstract)... view less
Keywords
design; offender-victim relationship; victim; survey; interview; data; empirical social research; Federal Republic of Germany; criminality; validity; research planning; data capture
Classification
Criminal Sociology, Sociology of Law
Methods and Techniques of Data Collection and Data Analysis, Statistical Methods, Computer Methods
Method
empirical; development of methods; quantitative empirical; basic research
Free Keywords
Erhebung; survey; crime; victimization; nonresponse rate; interviewer cheating; selection effects
Document language
German
Publication Year
2000
Page/Pages
p. 96-117
Journal
Kölner Zeitschrift für Soziologie und Sozialpsychologie, 52 (2000) 1
Status
Published Version; reviewed
Licence
Deposit Licence - No Redistribution, No Modifications
Data providerThis metadata entry was indexed by the Special Subject Collection Social Sciences, USB Cologne