Reddy Madhavi K, Fleming Matthew T, Howells Nicolette L, Rabenhorst Mandy M, Casselman Robert, Rosenbaum Alan
Northern Illinois University, Department of Psychology, DeKalb 60115, USA.
Violence Vict. 2006 Aug;21(4):499-506.
This study replicates and extends the research of Rosenbaum, Rabenhorst, Reddy, Fleming, and Howells, which also appears in this special issue. Responses from 398 randomly assigned participants regarding differentially sensitive topics were collected via four methods of data collection: written questionnaires, face-to-face interviews, telephone interviews, and an automated telephonic data collection system (ATDC). Several significant differences in data collection methodology and topic area were found, including greater disclosure of sensitive information via the ATDC system than via face-to-face and paper-and-pencil conditions. Participants who were assigned to the ATDC condition felt significantly more comfortable answering questions compared to those in the face-to-face interview condition. Participants in the telephone interview condition reported answering significantly more carefully than participants answering via written questionnaire. Taken together, the results of this study and the previous one it replicates suggest that the ATDC produces disclosure rates that are at least equivalent to, if not greater than, those generated using traditional methods for collecting sensitive data.
本研究重复并扩展了罗森鲍姆、拉本霍斯特、雷迪、弗莱明和豪厄尔斯的研究,该研究也发表在本期特刊中。通过四种数据收集方法,收集了398名随机分配的参与者对不同敏感主题的回答:书面问卷、面对面访谈、电话访谈和自动电话数据收集系统(ATDC)。研究发现,数据收集方法和主题领域存在若干显著差异,包括通过ATDC系统披露的敏感信息比通过面对面和纸笔方式更多。与面对面访谈组的参与者相比,被分配到ATDC组的参与者在回答问题时感觉明显更自在。电话访谈组的参与者报告称,他们回答问题的认真程度明显高于通过书面问卷回答问题的参与者。综合来看,本研究及其所重复的先前研究的结果表明,ATDC产生的披露率至少与使用传统方法收集敏感数据的披露率相当,甚至可能更高。