27.10.2014 Views

Russel-Research-Method-in-Anthropology

Russel-Research-Method-in-Anthropology

Russel-Research-Method-in-Anthropology

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

Create successful ePaper yourself

Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.

Structured Interview<strong>in</strong>g I: Questionnaires 265<br />

viewed recently bereaved respondents about adjustment to widowhood. They<br />

<strong>in</strong>terviewed 192 respondents—104 <strong>in</strong> person, at home, and 88 by mailed questionnaire.<br />

Both groups got identical questions.<br />

On average, 82% of those <strong>in</strong>terviewed at home 3–4 weeks after los<strong>in</strong>g their<br />

husband or wife answered any given question. Just 68% of those who<br />

responded to the mailed questionnaire answered any given question. As Caserta<br />

et al. expla<strong>in</strong>, the physical presence of the <strong>in</strong>terviewer helped establish the<br />

rapport needed for ask<strong>in</strong>g sensitive and personal questions about the pa<strong>in</strong>ful<br />

experience of bereavement (ibid.:640).<br />

If you are work<strong>in</strong>g <strong>in</strong> a highly <strong>in</strong>dustrialized country, and if a very high<br />

proportion (at least 80%) of the population you are study<strong>in</strong>g has their own<br />

telephones, then consider do<strong>in</strong>g a phone survey whenever a self-adm<strong>in</strong>istered<br />

questionnaire would otherwise be appropriate.<br />

If you are work<strong>in</strong>g alone or <strong>in</strong> places where the mails and the phone system<br />

are <strong>in</strong>efficient for data collection, the drop-and-collect technique is a good<br />

alternative (see above, page 258).<br />

F<strong>in</strong>ally, there is no rule aga<strong>in</strong>st us<strong>in</strong>g more than one type of <strong>in</strong>terview. Mauritius,<br />

an island nation <strong>in</strong> the Indian Ocean, is an ethnically complex society.<br />

Ch<strong>in</strong>ese, Creoles, Franco-Mauritians, H<strong>in</strong>dus, Muslims, and other groups<br />

make up a population of about a million. Ari Nave (1997) was <strong>in</strong>terested <strong>in</strong><br />

how Mauritians ma<strong>in</strong>ta<strong>in</strong> their ethnic group boundaries, particularly through<br />

their choices of whom to marry. A government office on Mauritius ma<strong>in</strong>ta<strong>in</strong>s<br />

a list of all people over 18 on Mauritius, so it was relatively easy for Nave to<br />

get a random sample of the population.<br />

Contact<strong>in</strong>g the sample was another matter. Nave got back just 347 out 930<br />

mailed questionnaires, but he was able to <strong>in</strong>terview another 296 by telephone<br />

and face to face, for a total of 643, or 69% of his orig<strong>in</strong>al sample—a respectable<br />

completion rate.<br />

Us<strong>in</strong>g Interviewers<br />

There are several advantages to us<strong>in</strong>g multiple <strong>in</strong>terviewers <strong>in</strong> survey<br />

research. The most obvious is that you can <strong>in</strong>crease the size of the sample.<br />

Multiple <strong>in</strong>terviewers, however, <strong>in</strong>troduce several disadvantages, and whatever<br />

problems are associated with <strong>in</strong>terviewer bias are <strong>in</strong>creased with more than<br />

one <strong>in</strong>terviewer.<br />

Just as important, multiple <strong>in</strong>terviewers <strong>in</strong>crease the cost of survey<br />

research. If you can collect 100 <strong>in</strong>terviews yourself and ma<strong>in</strong>ta<strong>in</strong> careful quality<br />

control <strong>in</strong> your <strong>in</strong>terview technique, then hir<strong>in</strong>g one more <strong>in</strong>terviewer<br />

would probably not improve your research by enough to warrant both spend-

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!