Essay Sample: A Solution for Interviewer Bias in Community Health Assessment

Introduction

One of the advantages associated with the use of a survey in community health assessment is that it avoids interviewer bias (Community Tool Box, 2019). The term interviewer bias can be defined as an interviewer's partiality towards a preconceived response based on the tenor, phrasing, and structure of the questions found in the interview process. Questions with interview bias have been reported to influence the interviewees to respond in the desired way, thus distorting the outcome of the interview. In the survey, there is no interviewer bias since the interviewer has no face-to-face conduct with the interviewee- thus not capable of influencing the interviewee to respond in a particular manner. Secondly, interviewer bias is avoided in surveys because the researcher is not directly involved in the process of data collection. That is, unlike interviews, data collected through surveys are objective.

Is your time best spent reading someone else’s essay? Get a 100% original essay FROM A CERTIFIED WRITER!

Save 25%

There are various types of interview biases that are avoided through the use of survey data collection instruments. One of these biases is what is referred to as cultural bias- where interviewer's cultural norms result in wrong assumptions about the interviewees or the respondents (Evans, Hearn, Uhlemann, & Ivey, 2016; Bull, 2014; Bradt & Drummond, 2018). The second interviewer bias that is avoided through survey questionnaires is interviewer error. Interviewer error refers to mistakes made by interviewers when they fail to record survey responses correctly (Babin & Zikmund, 2015; D'Alessandro, Lowe, Winzar, Zikmund, & Babin, 2017).

Interviewer error is avoided in surveys because the respondents are required to the respondent to specific choices associated with questionnaire statements. Interviewer error is associated with both omissions and miscounts (Tourangeau, Edwards, Johnson, Bates, & Wolter, 2014). Additionally, surveys allow the researcher to avoid information/political bias (Bradt & Drummond, 2018). This is where an interviewer focuses on information that confirms the presence of predetermined notions rather than the pursuit of alternative beliefs. In such a case, there is an increased likelihood that the information recorded by the participants are those linked to his or her preconceptions rather than those of the respondents (Bradt & Drummond, 2018). Moreover, by using survey questionnaires, mistranslation, another type of interviewer bias, is avoided (Bradt & Drummond, 2018).

Apart from its benefits, there are difficulties associated with the use of surveys in community health assessments. One challenge is a low return rate (Community Tool Box, 2019; Dantzker, Hunter, & Quinn, 2016; Jackson, 2014; Wang & Park, 2016). There are various factors associated with low response rate when using surveys. One of the factors linked to low survey response rate is the research interests of participants (Saleh & Bista, 2017). When the participants are not interested in the topic or phenomenon of interest to the study, there is a decreased likelihood of returning the completed surveys. Consequently, the researcher should choose participants who have a keen interest in the study.

The low response rate in surveys is also attributable to the survey structure (Saleh & Bista, 2017). Regarding the survey structure, there is an increased likelihood that the respondents will open an email containing the subjects if the email indicates the nature of the research content. Secondly, respondents are more likely to complete a survey if the email invitation looks professional. Consequently, if the survey is unprofessional, there is a decreased likelihood that the respondents will fill out the survey. The low response rate in surveys has also been attributed to long survey questionnaires (Saleh & Bista, 2017). That is, participants are highly likely to fill out a survey if the questionnaire items are short and concise. Another aspect of the survey structure associated with a low response rate is open-ended questions. Respondents are less likely to finish a survey if it includes open-ended questions (Saleh & Bista, 2017). Lastly, there is a high likelihood that the participants will not fill out the survey if the email invitation does not include their names, thus resulting in low response rate (Saleh & Bista, 2017).

Low response rates in survey questionnaires are also attributable to communication methods. Regarding communication methods, it has been established that respondents are more likely to respond to surveys if they receive a reminder and vice versa (Saleh & Bista, 2017). Lastly, response rates in surveys are linked to the assurance of privacy and confidentiality (Saleh & Bista, 2017).

Advantage and Disadvantage of Community Involvement in Design of Survey

One benefit of involving the community in the design of a survey is that the survey is more likely to capture all aspects of the phenomenon of interest to the community health assessment. This is because the researcher is capable of fully understanding the community health problem and its dimensions. However, the involvement of community members in the design of surveys such as through seeking their opinions and ideas is disadvantageous because it is time-consuming. This is because every opinion has to be incorporated into the survey.

An Advantage and a Challenge of Involving the Community in the Implementation of a Survey and Reasons

One of the advantages linked to the involvement of the community in the implementation of the survey is increased the likelihood of participation in filling out of the survey (Biemer et al., 2017; Community Tool Box, 2019). This is because when the community is involved in implementation, there is ownership of the whole process (Butowski, 2016). Conversely, one of the disadvantages associated with community involvement is that it is time-consuming. This is because it takes much time to consult community members on every aspect of the survey.

References

Babin, B. J., & Zikmund, W. G. (2015). Essentials of marketing research. Boston, MA: Cengage Learning.

Biemer, P. P., Leeuw, E. D. de, Eckman, S., Edwards, B., Kreuter, F., Lyberg, L. E., ... West, B. T. (2017). Total survey error in practice. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons.

Bradt, D. A., & Drummond, C. M. (2018). Reference manual for humanitarian health professionals: Missioncraft in disaster relief series. New York, NY: Springer.

Bull, R. (2014). Investigative interviewing. New York, NY: Springer Science & Business Media.

Butowski, L. (2016). Tourism: From empirical research towards practical application. Norderstedt, Deutschland: BoD - Books on Demand.

Community Tool Box. (2019). Chapter 3. Assessing community needs and resources | section 13. Conducting surveys | main section | community tool box. Retrieved from https://ctb.ku.edu/en/table-of-contents/assessment/assessing-community-needs-and-resources/conduct-surveys/main

D'Alessandro, S., Lowe, B., Winzar, H., Zikmund, W., & Babin, B. J. (2017). Marketing research: Asia-pacific edition. Boston, MA: Cengage AU.

Dantzker, Hunter, R. D., & Quinn, S. T. (2016). Research methods for criminology and criminal justice. Hoboken, NJ: Jones & Bartlett Learning.

Evans, D. R., Hearn, M. T., Uhlemann, M. R., & Ivey, A. E. (2016). Essential interviewing: A programmed approach to effective communication. Boston, MA: Cengage Learning.

Jackson, S. L. (2014). Research methods: A modular approach. Boston, MA: Cengage Learning.

Saleh, A., & Bista, K. (2017). Examining factors impacting online survey response rates in educational research: Perceptions of graduate students. Journal of MultiDisciplinary Evaluation, 13(29), 63-74.

Tourangeau, R., Edwards, B., Johnson, T. P., Bates, N., & Wolter, K. M. (2014). Hard-to-survey populations. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

Wang, G. T., & Park, K. (2016). Student research and report writing: From topic selection to the complete paper. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons.