Sage Journals: Discover world-class research

Abstract

Falsification of survey data in face-to-face surveys has been intensively discussed in the literature. The results about the impact of falsifications on survey data are equivocal. While some authors report a strong impact, others find only little differences between real and falsified data. We argue that the impact of falsifications cannot be neglected, particularly when theory-driven analyses are conducted and not ad hoc analyses. The latter reproduce stereotypes used by both, researchers and falsifiers. To test this assumption we compare the results of multivariate regression analyses with real and falsified data by using a) theory-driven predictors and b) ad hoc predictors. As an example of theory-driven analyses we used the theory of planned behavior (TPB) for predicting self-reported healthy eating behavior. As ad hoc predictors we included socio-demographic information about the respondents known to the falsifiers as well as variables, which are indicated by everyday theories. The results show that theory-driven relationships were more strongly pronounced in the real data. In contrast, stereotypical and non-theory-driven relationships were more strongly pronounced in the falsified data. The results provide insights in the area of social cognition when predicting the behavior of others.

Keywords

Interviewer falsifications falsified survey data data quality

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Mangione

T.W.

, Fowler

F.J.

and Louis

T.A.

, Question characteristics and interviewer effects, Journal of Official Statistics 8(3) (1992), 293-307.

Bredl

, Storfinger

and Menold

, A literature review of methods to detect fabricated survey data, in: Interviewers` Deviations in Surveys, Winker

, Menold

and Porst

, eds, Frankfurt: Peter Lang, 2013, pp. 3-24.

Sodeur

, Entscheidungsspielräume von Interviewern bei der Wahrscheinlichkeitsauswahl, Methoden Daten Analysen 1(2) (2007), 107-130.

Turner

C.F.

, Gribbe

J.N.

, Al-Tayyip

A.A.

and Chromy

J.R.

, Falsification in Epidemiologic Surveys: Detection and Remediation (Prepublication Draft). Technical Papers on Health and Behavior Measurement No. 53. Research Triangle Institute. Washington DC, 2002.

Koch

, Gefälschte Interviews: Ergebnisse der Interviewerkontrolle beim ALLBUS 1994, ZUMA-Nachrichten 36 (1995), 89-105.

Krejsa

E.A.

, Davis

M.C.

and Hill

J.M.

, Evaluation of the quality assurance Falsification interview used in the census 2000 dress rehearsal, Proceedings of the American Statistical Association (Survey Research Methods Section) (1999), 635-640.

, Brick

J.M.

, Tran

and Singer

, Using statistical models for sample Design of a reinterview program, Proceedings of the American Statistical Association (Survey Research Methods Section) (2009), 4681-4695.

Bredl

, Winker

and Kötschau

, A statistical approach to detect interviewer falsification of survey data, Survey Methodology 38(1) (2012), 1-10.

Kuriakose

and Robbins

, Don't get duped: Fraud through duplication in public opinion surveys, Statistical Journal of the IAOS (2016), 1-11.

10.

Koczela

, Furlong

, McCarthy

and Mushtaq

, Curbstoning and beyond: Confronting data fabrication in survey research, Statistical Journal of The IAOS 31(3) (2015), 413-422. doi: 10.3233/SJI-150917.

11.

Reuband

K.-H.

, Interviews, die keine sind, ``Erfolge'' und ``Mißerfolge'' beim Fälschen von Interviews, Kölner Zeitschrift für Soziologie und Sozialpsychologie 42(4) (1990), 706-733.

12.

Schnell

, Der Einfluss gefälschter Interviews auf Survey-Ergebnisse, Zeitschrift für Soziologie 20(1) (1991), 25-35.

13.

Menold

and Kemper

C.J.

, How do real and falsified data differ? Psychology of survey response as a source of falsification indicators in face-to-face surveys, International Journal of Public Opinion Research 26(1) (2014), 41-65. doi: 10.1093/ijpor/edt017.

14.

Schraepler

J.-P.

and Wagner

G.G.

, Identification, characteristics and impact of faked interviews in surveys, an analysis by means of genuine fakes in the raw data of SOEP. IZA Discussion Paper No. 969, Forschungsinstitut zur Zukunft der Arbeit, 2003.

15.

Ajzen

, The theory of planned behavior, Organizational Behavior And Human Decision Processes 50 (1991), 179-211.

16.

Hilton

J.L.

and von Hippel

, Stereotypes, Annual Review of Psychology 47 (1996), 237-271.

17.

Moskowitz

G.B.

, Social cognition, Understanding self and others, New York: Guilford Press, 2005.

18.

Menold

, Winker

, Storfinger

and Kemper

C.J.

, A method for ex-post-identification of falsifications in survey data, in: Interviewers' Deviations in Surveys, Winker

, Menold

and Porst

, eds, Frankfurt: Peter Lang, 2013, pp. 25-48.

19.

Kemper

C.J.

and Menold

, Nuisance or remedy? The utility of stylistic responding as an indicator of data fabrication in surveys, Methodology (2014). Advanced online publication, doi: 10.1027/1614-2241/a000078.

20.

Winker

, Kruse

K.W.

, Menold

and Landrock

, Interviewer effects in real and falsified interviews: results from a large scale experiment, Statistical Journal of the IAOS 31(3) (2015), 423-434. doi: http://dx.doi.org/103233/SJI-150908.

21.

Ajzen

and Krebs

, Attitude theory and measurement: implications for survey research, in: Trends and Perspectives in Empirical Social Research, Borg

and Mohler

, eds, Berlin: de Gruyter, 1994, pp. 250-265.

22.

Billari

F.C.

, Philipov

and Testa

M.R.

, Attitudes, norms and perceived behavioural control: Explaining fertility intentions in bulgaria, European Journal of Population/Revue Européenne De Démographie 25(4) (2009), 439-465. doi: 10.1007/s10680-009-9187-9.

23.

Prapavessis

, Gaston

and DeJesus

, The theory of planned behavior as a model for understanding sedentary behavior, Psychology of Sport and Exercise 19 (2015), 23-32. doi: 10.1016/j.psychsport2015.02.001.

24.

Storfinger

and Winker

, Assessing the performance of clustering methods in falsification identification using bootstrap, in: Interviewers' Deviations in Surveys, Winker

, Menold

and Porst

, eds, Frankfurt: Peter Lang, 2013, pp. 49-65.

Validation of theoretical assumptions with real and falsified survey data

Abstract

Keywords

Get full access to this article

References