Table Of Content

' [ Interviewing in Research Social Hyman by Herbert H. with William J. Cobb, Jacob J. Feldman, Clyde W. Hart, and Charles Herbert Stember " n "I "t'r > iff New With a Introduction by the Author INTERVIEWING IN SOCIAL RESEARCH SOCIAL SCIENCE RESEARCH COUNCIL NATIONAL RESEARCH COUNCIL (1954) Joint Committee on Measurement of Opinion Attitudes and Consumer Wants Samuel A. Stouffer, Chairman George Gallup S S. Wilks, Vice-Chairman Philip M. Hauser P. G. Agnew Carl I. Hovland Edward Battey George F. Hussey, Jr. Hadley Cantril Paul F. Lazarsfeld Archibald M. Crossley Rensis Likert W. Edwards Deming Darrell B. Lucas Robert F. Elder Elmo Roper Walter A. Shewhart Subcommittee on Studies of Interviewer Effect Frederick F. Stephan, Chairman George Gallup Archibald M. Crossley Paul F. Lazarsfeld W. Edwards Deming Rensis Likert Elmo Roper INTERVIEWING SOCIAL RESEARCH IN By HERBERT HYMAN H. with WILLIAM COBB J. JACOB FELDMAN J. CLYDE W. HART CHARLES HERBERT STEMBER Foreword by SAMUEL A. STOUFFER THE UNIVERSITY OF CHICAGO PRESS CHICAGO LONDON 8c A Research Project of the NATIONAL OPINION RESEARCH CENTER Clyde W. Hart, Director The University of Chicago Press, Chicago 60637 TheUniversityofChicagoPress,Ltd.,London © 1954, 1915 by The University of Chicago. All rights reserved.Published 1954. Seventh Impression 1915. Printed inthe UnitedStatesofA?nerica. ISBN:0-226-36539-5 (cloth);0-226-36538-1 (paper) Library ofCongressCatalogCardNumber:14-22906 TABLE OF CONTENTS Foreword, by SamuelA. Stouffer vii Preface, by Clyde W. Hart ix Introduction to the Phoenix Edition, by Herbert H. Hyman . . . xiii I. A Frame of Reference for the Study of Interviewer Effect . 1 II. The Definition of the Interview Situation 34 .... III. Sources of Effect Deriving from the Interviewer 83 IV. Respondent Reaction in the Interview Situation 138 . . . . V. Situational Determinants of Interviewer Effect 171 . . . . VI. Interviewer Effects under Normal Operating Conditions 225 . VII. Reduction and Control of Error 275 Appendix A. Procedural and Methodological Data Bearing on the Quali- tative Materials for Chapter II, The Definition of the Inter- view Situation 348 1. The Intensive Interviews with Interviewers 349 2. The Case Studies of Particular Interview Situations . . . 352 3. Interviewer Experiences as Revealed while Listening to a Transcription of an Interview 357 NORC B. Training and Field Procedures 361 C. Bibliography for Chapter VI 371 NORC D. Previous Publications, Interviewer Effect Series 374 . . Index 409 Foreword What people say as well as what people do are woven into the fabric of history. In the last three decades there has been a technological revolution in the recording of the spoken opinions of representative samples of entire populations. Historians, so many of whom are humanists with an aversion to tools like statistical devices for sampling or like IBM punched cards for analysis, have been slow, indeed, to recognize the significance for their profession of this technological revolution. But not so other social scientists, especially in social psychology and sociology. And not so industrial organizations, which have found that systematic sampling of opinion of management and workers, of cus- tomers, and of the general public can provide facts indispensable for policy-making. This technological revolution has depended on many inventions. One class of inventions involves the application of mathematical principles to the selection of a sample which can reproduce the responses of a population, with a small calculable error. Another class of inventions involves the development of scales of measurement. Still another involves a host of new techniques of analysis, facilitated by the miracles performed by new electronic computing machines. A large and cumu- lative literature of new ideas and criticism is helping to make each of these processes more effective. More study is needed. Butthere is one link in this effort, in particular, whichthus far has notreceived as much constructively critical examina- tion as its importance deserves. This l—ink is the human middleman in the normal process of eliciting opinions the interviewer. In spite of the obvious possibility that bias, conscious or unconscious, of the interviewer might cause serious bias in responses, there has been surprisingly little systematic study of the interviewer and the interviewing process itself. To help fill this gap, the present volume provides a much-needed fund of information. The major studies which led to this book had their genesis in a com- bined interest, shortly after World War II, expressed by the National Research Council, on behalf of the natural sciences, and the Social Science Research Council, on behalf ofthe social sciences. A joint committee of the two councils was established, called the Committee on the vii Foreword viii Measurement of Opinion, Attitudes, and Consumer Wants. The committee was a diverse body, comprising mathematicians, social scientists, leading practitioners of public opinion research, and representatives of — important consumers of applied research in advertising agencies, industrial establishments, and such associations as the American Standards Association and the American Society for Testing Materials. Among the first problems which this committee examined was the need for a systematic study of the interviewer and the interviewing process. The authors ofthe present volume were urged to undertake this study, with financial assistance provided through the vision of the Rockefeller Foundation. The committee takes no credit for and assumes no responsibility for the conclusions ofthe authors, who were left completely free to publish any findings they chose, without prior review or criticism. As chairman of the committee, however, the writer of this Foreword wishes per- sonally to commend this volume to a wide reading public. This volume is important both in its substantive findings and in the waysit reaches them. The authors are not "mere technicians." Sophisti- cated in psychological and sociological theory, they have molded theory into operational propositions and have put these propositions to the test with actual field investigations and experiments. What they say is not intended to be the last word on the subject. Standing on the shoulders of work previously done, they give us a clearer and wider vision than we have ever had before of the human element in the interviewing process. It is to be hoped that future in- vestigators, standing in turn on the shoulders of the present authors, can, in the years ahead, extend the vista further. For the work of ascertaining the thoughts and wishes of people, their hopes and frustrations, their attitudes and values, is becoming ever more important to the complex world in which we live. Samuel A. Stouffer Harvard University