RTI uses cookies to offer you the best experience online. By clicking “accept” on this website, you opt in and you agree to the use of cookies. If you would like to know more about how RTI uses cookies and how to manage them please view our Privacy Policy here. You can “opt out” or change your mind by visiting: http://optout.aboutads.info/. Click “accept” to agree.
PURPOSE/OVERVIEW: Analysis of survey data from the National Survey on Drug Use and Health (NSDUH) has shown a relationship between interviewer experience, response rates, and the prevalence of self-reported substance use (Eyerman, Odom, Wu, & Butler, 2002; Hughes, Chromy, Giacoletti, & Odom, 2001, 2002). These analyses have shown a significant and positive relationship between the amount of prior experience an interviewer has with collecting NSDUH data and the response rates that the interviewer produces with his or her workload. The analyses also have shown a significant and negative relationship between the amount of prior experience of an interviewer and the prevalence of substance use reported in cases completed by that interviewer. This chapter describes the methodology employed to explain these effects within a unified theoretical framework.
METHODS: The prior analyses mentioned above examined interviewer response rates and prevalence independently. This has made it difficult to determine whether the lower prevalence estimates for experienced interviewers are a result of the change in the sample composition due to higher response rates or whether the lower prevalence estimates are a result of a direct effect of interviewer behavior on respondent self-reporting. This study combines these two explanations to produce a conceptual model that summarizes the expectations for the relationship between interviewer experience and prevalence estimates. The combined explanation from the conceptual model is evaluated in a series of conditional models to examine the indirect effect of response rates and the direct effect of interviewer experience on prevalence estimates.
RESULTS/CONCLUSIONS: The analysis shows that increased interviewer experience simultaneously increases response rates and decreases prevalence estimates. In addition, the effect of increased interviewer experience on prevalence cannot be fully explained by weight adjustments based on earlier models (i.e., screening and interview level). In other words, the interviewer effect on prevalence cannot be fully attributed to the increase in response rates by experienced interviewers. Furthermore, interviewer experience was significant in the final model, showing that the covariates also did not account for all the decrease in prevalence. A statistical analysis of marginal and incremental prevalence estimates based on three levels of interviewer experience showed that plausible explanations for the decrease in prevalence for experienced interviewers include (1) lower substance use reporting by the additional respondents and (2) lower reporting of substance use by respondents that interviewers with all levels of experience interview.
