A Comparison of Confidential versus Anonymous Survey Procedures: Effects on Reporting of Drug Use and Related Attitudes and Beliefs in a National Study of Students
Restricted accessResearch articleFirst published online January, 2000
A Comparison of Confidential versus Anonymous Survey Procedures: Effects on Reporting of Drug Use and Related Attitudes and Beliefs in a National Study of Students
This study presents a comparison of reporting of drug use and related attitudes and beliefs by national samples of eighth and tenth grade students under two different modes of administration conditions: confidential and anonymous. The results show that there were clearly no differences between the conditions in tenth graders' reports of drug use and related attitudes and beliefs. With eighth graders, the results show, at most, only a very modest mode of administration effect and quite possibly no effect at all. The results are reassuring to researchers who conduct surveys of drug use and related attitudes and beliefs among secondary school students.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
BachmanJ.G.JohnstonL.D.O'MalleyP.M.1996The Monitoring the Future Project after twenty-two years: Design and procedures. (Monitoring the Future Occasional Paper No. 38) Ann Arbor: Institute for Social Research.
2.
BachmanJ.G.JohnstonL.D.O'MalleyP.M.1998Explaining the recent increases in students' marijuana use: The impacts of perceived risks and disapproval from 1976 through 1996. American Journal of Public Health, 88:887–892.
3.
HabermanP.W.JosephsonE.ZanesH.ElinsonJ.1972High school drug use behavior: A methodological report on pilot studies. In EinsteinS.AllenS. (Eds.) Student Drug Use Surveys. Farmingdale, NY: Baywood.
4.
HarrisonL.D.1995The validity of self-reported data on drug use. Journal of Drug Issues, 25:91–111.
5.
JohnstonL.D.O'MalleyP.M.BachmanJ.G.1998National survey results on drug use from the Monitoring the Future Study, 1975–1997. Vol. 1, Secondary school students. (NIH Publication No. 98-4345). Rockville, MD: National Institute on Drug Abuse.
6.
KingF.W.1970Anonymous versus identifiable questionnaires in drug usage surveys. American Psychologist, 25:982–985.
7.
LauerR.M.AkersR.L.MasseyJ.ClarkeW.R.1982Evaluation of cigarette smoking among adolescents: The Muscatine study. Preventive Medicine, 11:417–428.
8.
LesslerJ.T.O'ReillyJ.M.1997Mode of interview and reporting of sensitive issues: Design and implementation of audio-computer-assisted self-interviewing. In HarrisonL.HughesA. (Eds.), The Validity of Self-Reported Drug Use: Improving the Accuracy of Survey Estimates. (NIDA Research Monograph 167), pp. 366–382. NIH Publication 97–4147. Washington, D.C.: National Institute on Drug Abuse.
9.
LuetgertM.J.ArmstrongA.H.1973Methodological issues in drug usage surveys: Anonymity, recency, and frequency. International Journal of the Addictions, 8:683–689.
10.
MalvinI.H.MoskowitzJ.M.1983Anonymous versus identifiable self-reports of adolescent drug attitudes, intentions, and use. Public Opinion Quarterly, 47:566–577.
11.
RaghunathanT.E.SolenbergerP.W.Van HoewykJ.1999SRC/SMP Variance Estimation/Imputation Software. Ann Arbor: Institute for Social Research.
12.
RootmanI.SmartR.G.1985A comparison of alcohol, tobacco and drug use as determined from household and school surveys. Drug and Alcohol Dependence, 16:89–94.
