IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/evarev/v23y1999i3p316-335.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Differential Attrition Rates and Active Parental Consent

Author

Listed:
  • Finn-Aage Esbensen

    (University of Nebraska–Omaha)

  • Michelle Hughes Miller

    (University of Nebraska–Omaha)

  • Terrance Taylor

    (University of Nebraska–Omaha)

  • Ni He

    (University of Texas–San Antonio)

  • Adrienne Freng

    (University of Nebraska–Lincoln)

Abstract

Active parental consent in survey research poses ethical and practical concerns. One common argument against the requirement of active consent procedures is its effect on participation rates. There is additional concern that higher risk groups may be underrepresented in the final sample. Empirical support of differential attrition, however, is lacking. In the current multisite longitudinal study, passive consent procedures were approved for the collection of pretest data. For subsequent years of data collection, active parental consent procedures were required. In this article, we use the pretest data to examine demographic, attitudinal, and behavioral differences between those students for whom active consent was provided and those for whom active consent was either denied or for whom no response was received. The results indicate that active consent procedures produce deleterious effects on participation rates and lead to an underrepresentation of at-risk youth in the sample.

Suggested Citation

  • Finn-Aage Esbensen & Michelle Hughes Miller & Terrance Taylor & Ni He & Adrienne Freng, 1999. "Differential Attrition Rates and Active Parental Consent," Evaluation Review, , vol. 23(3), pages 316-335, June.
  • Handle: RePEc:sae:evarev:v:23:y:1999:i:3:p:316-335
    DOI: 10.1177/0193841X9902300304
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0193841X9902300304
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/0193841X9902300304?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    More about this item

    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:sae:evarev:v:23:y:1999:i:3:p:316-335. 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: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    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.