Misunderstanding standardized language in research interviews

Applied Cognitive Psychology

Volumn 18, Issue 2, 2004, Pages 169-188

  Schober, Michael F ^a   Conrad, Frederick G ^b   Fricker, Scott S ^c  

^a NEW SCHOOL FOR SOCIAL RESEARCH   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN   (United States)

^c BUREAU OF LABOR STATISTICS   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ACCURACY; APTITUDE TEST; ARTICLE; COMPREHENSION; CONTROLLED STUDY; EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN; FACTORIAL ANALYSIS; FEMALE; HEALTH SURVEY; HUMAN; HUMAN EXPERIMENT; INTERVIEW; LANGUAGE ABILITY; MALE; METHODOLOGY; NORMAL HUMAN; PRIORITY JOURNAL; STANDARDIZATION; WORD RECOGNITION;

EID: 7744224165     PISSN: 08884080     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/acp.955     Document Type: Article

References (41)

1. Barrow, H. S. (1993). An overview of the use of standardized patients for teaching and evaluating clinical skills. Academic Medicine, 68, 443-453.
2. Beatty, P. (1995). Understanding the standardized/non-standardized interviewing controversy. Journal of Official Statistics, 11, 147-160.
3. Bradburn, N. M., Sudman, S., and Associates. (1979). Improving interview method and questionnaire design: Response effects to threatening questions in survey research. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
4. Butcher, J. N. (1972). Objective personality assessment: Changing perspectives. New York: Academic Press.
5. Clark, H. H. (1996). Using language. Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press.
6. Clark, H. H., & Wilkes-Gibbs, D. (1986). Referring as a collaborative process. Cognition, 22, 1-39.
7. Condon, S. P., & Schober, M. F. (2002). Abstract of the Psychonomic Society 43rd Annual Meeting.
8. Conrad, F. G., & Schober, M. F. (2000). Clarifying question meaning in a household telephone survey. Public Opinion Quarterly, 64 1-28.
9. Fisher, R. P., Geiselman, R. E., & Raymond, D. S. (1987). Critical analysis of police interview techniques. Journal of Police Science and Administration, 15, 177-185.
10. Fowler, F. J., & Mangione, T. W. (1990). Standardized survey interviewing: Minimizing interviewer-related error. Newbury Park, CA: SAGE Publications, Inc.
11. Grudin, J. (1989). The case against user interface consistency. Communications of the ACM, 32, 1164-1173.
12. Gulliksen, J., & Sandblad, B. (1995). Domain-specific design of user interfaces. International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction, 7(2), 135-151.
13. Gwyer, P., & Clifford, B. R. (1997). The effects of the cognitive interview on recall, identification, confidence, and the confidence/accuracy relationship. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 11 2), 121-145.
14. Houtkoop-Steenstra, H. (2000). Interaction and the standardized survey interview: The living questionaire. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
15. Huffcutt, A. I., & Woehr, D. J. (1999). Further analysis of employment interview validity: a quantitative evaluation of interview-related structuring methods. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 20, 549-560.
16. Kahn, R., & Cannell, C. (1957). The dynamics of interviewing: Theory, techniques, and cases. New York: John Wiley & Sons.
17. Mangione, T. W., Fowler, F. J., & Louis, T. A. (1992). Question characteristics and interviewer effects. Journal of Official Statistics, 8, 293-307.
18. Marlaire, C. L., & Maynard, D. W. (1990). Standardized testing as an interactional phenomenon. Sociology of Education, 63, 83-101.
19. Meehl, P. (1947). The dynamics of 'structured' personality tests. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 3, 296-303.
20. Memon, A., Holley, A., Milne, R., Koehnken, G., & Bull, R. (1994). Towards understanding the effects of interviewer training in evaluation of the cognitive interview. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 8 641-659.
21. Mishler, E. G. (1986). Research interviewing. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
22. Morton-Williams, J. (1979). The use of 'verbal interaction coding' for evaluating a questionnaire. Quality and Quantity, 13, 59-75.
23. Pangalo, G. J. (1993). Designing the user-interface. Computers in Industry, 22, 193-200.
24. Pangaro, L. N., Worth-Dickstein, H., Macmillan, M. K., Klass, D. J., & Shatzer, J. H. (1997). Performance of 'standardized examinees' in a standardized-patient examination of clinical skills. Academic Medicine, 72(11), 1008-1010.
25. Schaeffer, N. C. (2002). Conversation with a purpose-or conversation? Interaction in the standardized interview. In D. Maynard, H. Houtkoop-Steenstra, N. C. Schaeffer, & J. van der Zouwen (Eds.), Standardization and tacit knowledge: Interaction and practice in the survey interview (pp. 95-123). New York: Wiley.
26. Schober, M. F. (1998). Conversational evidence for rethinking meaning. Social Research, 65, 511-534.
27. Schober, M. F. (1999). Making sense of questions: an interactional approach. In M. G. Sirken, D. J. Hermann, S. Schechter, N. Schwarz, J. M. Tanur, & R. Tourangeau (Eds.), Cognition and survey research (pp. 77-93). New York: John Wiley & Sons.
28. Schober, M. F., & Clark, H. H. (1989). Understanding by addressees and overhearers. Cognitive Psychology, 21, 211-232.
29. Schober, M. F., & Conrad, F. G. (1997). Does conversational interviewing reduce survey measurement error? Public Opinion Quarterly, 61, 576-602.
30. Schober, M. F., & Conrad, F. G. (2002). A collaborative view of standardized survey interviews. In D. Maynard, H. Houtkoop-Steenstra, N. C. Schaeffer, & J. van der Zouwen (Eds.), Standardization and tacit knowledge: Interaction and practice in the survey interview (pp. 67-94). New York: Wiley.
31. Schober, M. F., Conrad, F. G., & Bloom, J. E. (2000). Clarifying word meanings in computer-administered survey interviews. In L. R. Gleitman, & A. K. Joshi (Eds.), Proceedings of the 22nd Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society (pp. 447-452). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
32. Smith, V. L., Kassin, S. M., & Ellsworth, P. C. (1989). Eyewitness accuracy and confidence: within-versus between-subject correlations. Journal of Applied Psychology, 74, 356-359.
33. Speak, M. (1967). Communication failure in questioning: errors, misinterpretations, and personal frames of reference. Occupational Psychology, 41(4), 169-181.
34. Suchman, L., & Jordan, B. (1990). Interactional troubles in face-to-face survey interviews. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 85, 232-253.
35. Suchman, L., & Jordan, B. (1991). Validity and the collaborative construction of meaning in face-to-face surveys. In J. M. Tanur (Ed.), Questions about questions: Inquiries into the cognitive bases of surveys (pp. 241-267). New York: Russell Sage Foundation.
36. Tanaka, T., Eberts, R. E., & Salvendy, G. (1991). Consistency of human-computer interface design: quantification and validation. Human Factors, 33(6), 653-676.
37. Tourangeau, R., Rips, L. J., & Rasinski, K. (2000). The psychology of survey response. New York: Cambridge.
38. U.S. Department of Commerce. (1994). Current Population Survey interviewing manual (CPS-250). Washington, DC: Bureau of the Census.
39. Viterna, J. S., & Maynard, D. W. (2002). How uniform is standardization? Variation within and across survey research centers regarding protocols for interviewing. In D. Maynard, H. Houtkoop-Steenstra, N. C. Schaeffer, & J. van der Zouwen (Eds.), Standardization and tacit knowledge: Interaction and practice in the survey interview (pp. 365-397). New York: Wiley.
40. Wechsler, D. (1997). WAIS-III administration and scoring manual: Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale (3rd ed.). San Antonio, TX: The Psychological Corporation.
41. Wright, O. R. (1969). Summary of research on the selection interview since 1964. Personnel Psychology, 22, 391-413.