Sigelman C K, Budd E C, Winer J L, Schoenrock C J, Martin P W
Am J Ment Defic. 1982 Mar;86(5):511-8.
In an examination of methodological issues involved in interviewing retarded persons, alternatively worded or structured questions were embedded in interviews with three samples. Questioning techniques were evaluated according to the extent to which (a) interviewees could provide answers, (b) their answers agreed with parallel responses given by attendants or parents, and (c) answers were free of systematic response bias. Open-ended questions were found to be unanswerable by many persons, and supplementing them with clarifying examples and probes for additional information only exacerbated response bias. By comparison, yes-no checklists enhanced responsiveness but introduced serious acquiescence bias, whereas multiple choice questions, particularly with pictures, yielded valid answers from high proportions of interviewees. Implications for question design were discussed.
在一项关于访谈智障人士所涉及的方法学问题的研究中，措辞不同或结构不同的问题被嵌入到对三个样本的访谈中。根据以下几个方面对提问技巧进行了评估：（a）受访者能否提供答案；（b）他们的答案与陪护人员或父母给出的类似回答是否一致；（c）答案是否没有系统性的回答偏差。发现许多人无法回答开放式问题，用澄清示例和追问以获取更多信息来补充这些问题只会加剧回答偏差。相比之下，是/否清单提高了回答率，但引入了严重的默认偏差，而多项选择题，尤其是配有图片的多项选择题，能从很大比例的受访者那里得到有效的答案。文中讨论了对问题设计的启示。
