IDEAS home Printed from
MyIDEAS: Log in (now much improved!) to save this article

An investigation into expectation-led interviewer effects in health surveys

Listed author(s):
  • Clarke, Paul
  • Sproston, Kerry
  • Thomas, Roger
Registered author(s):

    Many large-scale health surveys use interviewers to obtain standardised information about the health of the general population. To improve response rates and data quality, the researchers/designers usually brief the interviewers to familiarise them with the survey procedures and stimulate their interest in the survey. However, it is possible that interviewers, having been exposed to researchers' expectations, may inadvertently influence respondents to produce outcomes consistent with those expectations. Such expectations are referred to here as 'expectation-led interviewer effects'. In this paper, the design and results from an experiment to test for expectation-led interviewer effects are described. The experiment involved conducting two health surveys, called the 'experimental' and the 'control', which were identical in every way except that researchers made a reference to a supposed link between childhood and adult health at the experimental survey briefing. The testing procedure was designed prior to data collection to preclude accusations of data dredging and to ensure that the type I error probability was less than 5 percent. No consistent evidence of expectation-led interviewer effects was found, bar a statistically significant effect for health questions requiring the recall of detailed quantitative information. This effect was small, however.

    If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.

    File URL:
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.

    Article provided by Elsevier in its journal Social Science & Medicine.

    Volume (Year): 56 (2003)
    Issue (Month): 10 (May)
    Pages: 2221-2228

    in new window

    Handle: RePEc:eee:socmed:v:56:y:2003:i:10:p:2221-2228
    Contact details of provider: Web page:

    Order Information: Postal:

    No references listed on IDEAS
    You can help add them by filling out this form.

    This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

    When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:socmed:v:56:y:2003:i:10:p:2221-2228. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Dana Niculescu)

    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.

    If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

    If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link to it, you can help with 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 profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

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

    This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis using RePEc data.