Home > Publications . Search All . Browse All . Country . Browse PSC Pubs . PSC Report Series

PSC In The News

RSS Feed icon

Frey says China is source country of most new U.S. immigrants

Rodriguez, Geronimus, Bound and Dorling find excess mortality among blacks influences key elections

DeWitt's map of 40-year shifts in Baltimore's racial composition helps explain April 2015 uprising

Highlights

Cheng wins ASA Outstanding Graduate Student Paper Award

Hicken wins 2015 UROP Outstanding Research Mentor Award

U-M ranked #1 in Sociology of Population by USN&WR's "Best Graduate Schools"

PAA 2015 Annual Meeting: Preliminary program and list of UM participants

Next Brown Bag

Mon, May 18
Lois Verbrugge, Disability Experience & Measurement

Frederick G. Conrad photo

Interviewer speech and the success of survey invitations

Publication Abstract

Conrad, Frederick G., J. Broome, J. Benki, F. Kreuter, Robert M. Groves, D. Vannette, and C. McClain. 2013. "Interviewer speech and the success of survey invitations." Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series a-Statistics in Society, 176: 191-210.

When potential survey respondents decide whether or not to participate in a telephone interview, they may consider what it would be like to converse with the interviewer who is currently inviting them to respond, e. g. how he or she sounds, speaks and interacts. In the study that is reported here, we examine the effect of three interactional speech behaviours on the outcome of survey invitations: interviewer fillers (e. g. 'um' and 'uh'), householders' backchannels (e. g. 'uh huh' and 'I see') and simultaneous speech or 'overspeech' between interviewer and householder. We examine how these behaviours are related to householders' decisions to participate (agree), to decline the invitation (refusal) or to defer the decision (scheduled call-back) in a corpus of 1380 audiorecorded survey invitations (contacts). Agreement was highest when interviewers were moderately disfluent-neither robotic nor so disfluent as to appear incompetent. Further, household members produced more backchannels, a behaviour which is often assumed to reflect a listener's engagement, when they ultimately agreed to participate than when they refused. Finally, there was more simultaneous speech in contacts where householders ultimately refused to participate; however, interviewers interrupted household members more when they ultimately scheduled a call-back, seeming to pre-empt householders' attempts to refuse. We discuss implications for hiring and training interviewers, as well as the development of automated speech interviewing systems.

DOI:10.1111/j.1467-985X.2012.01064.x (Full Text)

Browse | Search : All Pubs | Next