This study describes a method for collecting data from nonliterate, non-English-speaking populations. Our audio computer-assisted self-interview instrument with color-labeled response categories was designed for use with helper assistance. The study included 30 dyads of nonliterate older Hmong respondents and family helpers answering questions about health. Analysis of video recordings identified respondents’ problems and helpers’ strategies to address these problems. Seven dyads displayed the paradigmatic question–answer sequence for all items, while 23 departed from the paradigmatic sequence at least once. Reports and pauses were the most common signs of problems displayed by respondents. Paraphrasing questions or response categories and providing examples were the most common helper strategies. Future research could assess the impact of helpers’ strategies on data quality.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
AquilinoW. S.1994. Interview mode effects in surveys of drug and alcohol use: A field experiment. Public Opinion Quarterly58:210–40.
2.
BoeijeH. R.2004. And then there were three: Self-presentational styles and the presence of the partner as a third person in the interview. Field Methods16:3–22.
3.
BortfeldH.LeonS. D.BloomJ. E.SchoberM. F.BrennanS. E.. 2001. Disfluency rates in conversation: Effects of age, relationship, topic, role, and gender. Language and Speech44:123–47.
4.
BrennanS. E.WilliamsM.. 1995. The feeling of another’s knowing: Prosody and filled pauses as cues to listeners about the metacognitive states of speakers. Journal of Memory and Language34:383–98.
5.
CappsJ.RolfeS.LogsdonM. C.. 2016. Limited English proficiency: Impact on health literacy and health disparity. Kentucky Nurse64:13–14.
6.
ChauchardS.2013. Using MP3 players in surveys: The impact of a low-tech self-administration mode on reporting of sensitive attitudes. Public Opinion Quarterly77:220–31.
7.
DiopA.LeK. T.TraugottM.. 2015. Third-party presence effect with propensity score matching. Journal of Survey Statistics and Methodology3:193–215.
8.
DuffyJ.2007. Writing from these roots: Literacy in a Hmong–American community. Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press.
9.
EdwardsS. L.SlatteryM. L.MaK.. 1998. Measurement errors stemming from nonrespondents present at in-person interviews. Annals of Epidemiology8:272–77.
GarbarskiD.SchaefferN. C.DykemaJ.. 2011. Are interactional behaviors exhibited when the self-reported health question is asked associated with health status?Social Science Research40:1025–36.
12.
HanC.LeeE.IwayaT.KataokaH.KohzukiM.. 2004. Development of the Korean version of short-form 36-item health survey: Health related QOL of healthy elderly people and elderly patients in Korea. The Tohoku Journal of Experimental Medicine203:189–94.
13.
HarknessJ. A.Schoua-GlusbergA.. 1998. Questionnaires in translation. ZUMA-Nachrichten Spezial3:87–127.
14.
HolbrookA.ChoY. I.JohnsonT.. 2006. The impact of question and respondent characteristics on comprehension and mapping difficulties. Public Opinion Quarterly70:565–95.
15.
LamC. L. K.GandekB.RenX. S.ChanM. S.. 1998. Tests of scaling assumptions and construct validity of the Chinese (HK) version of the SF-36 health survey. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology51:1139–47.
16.
LauC. Q.BakerM.FioreA.GreeneD.LieskovskyM.MatuK.PeytchevaE.. 2016. Bystanders, noise, and distractions in face-to-face surveys in Africa and Latin America. International Journal of Social Research Methodology20:1–15.
17.
LeeG. Y.2010. Culture and customs of the Hmong. Santa Barbara, CA: Greenwood.
18.
Lewin-EpsteinN.Sagiv-SchifterT.ShabtaiE. L.ShmueliA.. 1998. Validation of the 36-item short-form health survey (Hebrew version) in the adult population of Israel. Medical Care36:1361–70.
19.
LinkM. W.MokdadA. H.StackhouseH. F.FlowersN. T.. 2006. Race, ethnicity, and linguistic isolation as determinants of participation in public health surveillance surveys. Preventing Chronic Disease3:A09.
20.
LorM.BowersB. J.. 2017. Feasibility of audio-computer-assisted self-interviewing with color-coding and helper assistance (ACASI-H) for Hmong older adults. Research in Nursing & Health40:360–71.
21.
MaynardD. W.SchaefferN. C.. 2006. Standardization in interaction: The survey interview. In Talking research, eds. MaynardD. W.SchaefferN. C., 9–27. London: Sage.
22.
MneimnehZ. M.TourangeauR.PennellB.HeeringaS. G.ElliottM. R.. 2015. Cultural variations in the effect of interview privacy and the need for social conformity on reporting sensitive information. Journal of Official Statistics31:673–97.
NoldusL. P.1991. The observer: A software system for collection and analysis of observational data. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, & Computers23:415–29.
26.
OlsonK.SmythJ. D.WangY.PearsonJ. E.. 2011. The self-assessed literacy index: Reliability and validity. Social Science Research40:1465–76.
27.
PfeiferM. E.SullivanJ.YangK.YangW.. 2012. Hmong population and demographic trends in the 2010 Census and 2010 American Community Survey. Hmong Studies Journal13:1–31.
28.
PollnerM.AdamsR. E.. 1997. The effects of spouse presence on appraisals of emotional support and household strain. Public Opinion Quarterly61:615–626.
29.
Quetulio-NavarraM.VaartW.NiehofA.. 2015. Can third-party help improve data quality in research interviews? A natural experiment in a hard-to-study population. Field Methods27:426–40.
30.
SchaefferN. C.DykemaJ.. 2011. Questions for surveys current trends and future directions. Public Opinion Quarterly75:909–61.
31.
SchaefferN. C.MaynardD. W.. 2002. Standardization and interaction in the survey interview. In Handbook of interviewing, eds. SchaefferN. C.MaynardD. W., 577–602. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
32.
SchaefferN. C.MaynardD. W.. 2008. The contemporary standardized survey interview for social research. In Envisioning the survey interview of the future, eds. SchaefferN. C.MaynardD. W., 31–57. New York: John Wiley.
33.
SchaefferN. C.ThomsonE.. 1992. The discovery of grounded uncertainty: Developing standardized questions about strength of fertility motivation. Sociological Methodology22:37–82.
34.
SchoberM. F.BloomJ. E.. 2004. Discourse cues that respondents have misunderstood survey questions. Discourse Processes38:287–308.
35.
SchoberM. F.ConradF. G.DijkstraW.OngenaY. P.. 2012. Disfluencies and gaze aversion in unreliable responses to survey questions. Journal of Official Statistics28:555–82.
36.
SmithS. A.1997. Contracts for the benefit of third parties: In defence of the third-party rule. Oxford Journal of Legal Studies17:643–63.
37.
SmithV. L.ClarkH. H.. 1993. On the course of answering questions. Journal of Memory and Language32:25–38.
WareJ.KosinskiM.KellerS. D.. 1996. A 12-item short-form health survey: Construction of scales and preliminary tests of reliability and validity. Medical Care34:220–33.
40.
ZippJ. F.TothJ.. 2002. She said, he said, they said: The impact of spousal presence in survey research. Public Opinion Quarterly66:177–208.
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
