"yours is better!" Participant response bias in HCI

Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems - Proceedings

Volumn , Issue , 2012, Pages 1321-1330

  Dell, Nicola ^a   Vaidyanathan, Vidya ^b   Medhi, Indrani ^c   Cutrell, Edward ^c   Thies, William ^c  

^a UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON   (United States)

^b SAN JOSE STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^c MICROSOFT RESEARCH   (United States)

Author keywords

Bias; Culture; Demand characteristics; HCI4D; ICTD; Interviewer effects; Methods; Social status

Indexed keywords

BIAS; DEMAND CHARACTERISTICS; HCI4D; ICTD; INTERVIEWER EFFECTS; METHODS; SOCIAL STATUS;

CELL CULTURE; HUMAN ENGINEERING;

HUMAN COMPUTER INTERACTION;

EID: 84862081069     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Conference Proceeding    
DOI: 10.1145/2207676.2208589     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (31)

1. Anokwa, Y., Smyth, T., Ramachandran, D., Sherwani, J., Schwartzman, Y., Luk, R., Ho, M., Moraveji, N., and DeRenzi, B. Stories from the Field: Reflections on HCI4D Experiences. ITID 5, 4 (2009).
2. Asch, S. Effects of Group Pressure Upon the Modification and Distortion of Judgements. In H. Guetzkow (ed.) Groups, Leadership, and Men (1951).
3. Bernhart, M., Wiadnyana, I., Wihardjo, H., and Pohan, I. Patient Satisfaction in Developing Countries. Social Science and Medicine 48 (1999).
4. Bignami-Van Assche, S., Reniers, G., and Weinreb, A. An Assessment of the KDICP and MDICP Data Quality. Demographic Research S1, 2 (2002).
5. Brown, B., Reeves, S., and Sherwood, S. Into the Wild: Challenges and Opportunities for Field Trial Methods. In CHI (2005).
6. Chavan, A. Another Culture, Another Method. In CHI (2005).
7. Czerwinski, M., Horvitz, E., and Cutrell, E. Subjective Duration Assessment: An Implicit Probe for Software Usability. In IHM-HCI Conference (2001).
8. Davis, R., Couper, M., Janz, N., Caldwell, C., and Resnicow, K. Interviewer Effects in Public Health Surveys. Health Education Research 25, 1 (2010).
9. Evers, V. Cross-Cultural Understanding of Metaphors in Interface Design. In Proc. Cultural Attitudes towards Technology and Communication (1998).
10. Evers, V., and Day, D. The Role of Culture in Interface Acceptance. In INTERACT'97 (1997).
11. Ho, M., Smyth, T., Kam, M., and Dearden, A. Human-Computer Interaction for Development: The Past, Present, and Future. ITID 5, 4 (2009).
12. Irani, L. HCI on the Move: Methods, Culture, Values. In CHI Extended Abstracts (2010).
13. Jacobsen, N. The Evaluator Effect in Usability Studies: Problem Detection and Severity Judgments. In Proc. of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society 42nd Annual Meeting (1998).
14. Johnson, T., and J, P. Interviewer Effects on Self-Reported Substance Use Among Homeless Persons. Addict Behavior 19 (1994).
15. Kane, S., Wobbrock, J., and Ladner, R. Usable Gestures for Blind People: Understanding Preference and Performance. In CHI (2011).
16. Kirchler, E., and Davis, J. The Influence of Member Status Differences and Task Type on Group Consensus and Member Position Change. Personality and Social Psychology 51, 1 (1986).
17. Laney, C., Kaasa, S., Morris, E., Berkowitz, S., Bernstein, D., and Loftus, E. The Red Herring technique: A Methodological Response to the Problem of Demand Characteristics. Psychological Research 72 (1962).
18. Ledlie, J. Huzzah for my Thing: Evaluating a Pilot of a Mobile Service in Kenya. Qual Meets Quant, London, UK (2010).
19. Mackay, W. Triangulation within and across HCI disciplines. Human-Computer Interaction 13, 3 (1998).
20. Milgram, S. Behavioral Study of Obedience. Abnormal and Social Psychology 67, 4 (1963).
21. Nichols, A., and Maner, J. The Good Subject Effect: Investigating Participant Demand Characteristics. General Psychology 135 (2008).
22. Orne, M. On the Social Psychology of the Psychological Experiment: With Particular Reference to Demand Characteristics and their Implications. American Psychologist 17 (1962).
23. Paulhus, D. Measurement and Control of Response Bias. J. P. Robinson, P. R. Shaver and L. S. Wrightsman eds. Measures of personality and social psychological attitudes (1991).
24. Read, J., and Fine, K. Using Survey Methods for Design and Evaluation in Child Computer Interaction. In Workshop on Child Computer Interaction: Methodological Research at Interact (2005).
25. Rosnow, R., Goodstadt, B., Suls, J., and Gitter, G. More on the social psychology of the experiment: When compliance turns to self-defense. Personality and Social Psychology 27, 3 (1973).
26. Sawyer, A. Detecting Demand Characteristics in Laboratory Experiments in Consumer Research: The Case of Repetition-Affect Research. Advances in Consumer Research Volume 02, eds. Mary Jane Schlinger: Association for Consumer Research (1975).
27. Strodtbeck, F., and Lipinski, R. Becoming First among Equals: Moral Considerations in Jury Foreman Selection. Personality and Social Psychology 49, 4 (1985).
28. Vatrapu, R., and Pérez-Quinones, M. Culture and Usability Evaluation: The Effects of Culture in Structured Interviews. Usability Studies 1 (2006).
29. Weinreb, A. The Limitations of Stranger-Interviewers in Rural Kenya. American Sociological Review 71 (2006).
30. Williams, J. Interviewer Role Performance: a Further Note on Bias in the Information Interview. Public Opinion Quarterly 32 (1968).
31. Zizzo, D. Experimenter Demand Effects in Economic Experiments. Available at SSRN: http://ssrn.com/abstract=1163863 (last accessed 09/03/2011), 2008.