IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/fpr/ifprid/2055.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Can survey design reduce anchoring bias in recall data? Evidence from Malawi

Author

Listed:
  • Godlonton, Susan
  • Hernandez, Manuel A.
  • Paz, Cynthia

Abstract

Recall biases in retrospective survey data are widely considered to be pervasive and have important implications for effective agricultural research. In this paper, we leverage the survey design literature and test three strategies to attenuate mental anchoring in retrospective data collection: question order effects, retrieval cues, and aggregate (community) anchoring. We embed a survey design experiment in a longitudinal survey of smallholder farmers in Malawi and focus on anchoring bias in maize production and happiness exploiting differences between recalled and concurrent responses. We find that asking for retrospective data before concurrent data reduces recall bias by approximately 34% for maize production, a meaningful improvement with no increase in survey data collection costs. Retrieval cues are less successful in reducing the bias for maize reports and involve more data collection time, while community anchors can exacerbate the bias. Reversing the order of questions and retrieval cues do not help to ease the bias for happiness reports.

Suggested Citation

  • Godlonton, Susan & Hernandez, Manuel A. & Paz, Cynthia, 2021. "Can survey design reduce anchoring bias in recall data? Evidence from Malawi," IFPRI discussion papers 2055, International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI).
  • Handle: RePEc:fpr:ifprid:2055
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.ifpri.org/cdmref/p15738coll2/id/134735/filename/134946.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Keywords

    MALAWI; SOUTHERN AFRICA; AFRICA SOUTH OF SAHARA; AFRICA; survey design; smallholders; farmers; surveys; maize; crops; recall bias; mental anchoring; recall data;
    All these keywords.

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:fpr:ifprid:2055. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: the person in charge (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/ifprius.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.