DOCSLIB.ORG

Book of Abstracts

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Book of Abstracts ESRA 2009 conference, Warsaw 29 June – 3 July 2009 Book of Abstracts June 25, 2009 Quick overview 1 Substantive Applications of Survey Methodology 1 1.1 Analysing Attitudes Towards Migration with Large Comparative Survey Data (I)2 1.2 Analysing Attitudes Towards Migration with Large Comparative Survey Data (II)3 1.3 Basic Human Values (I) . .6 1.4 Basic Human Values (II) . .9 1.5 Emotional Intelligence Research . 12 1.6 European Values Study (I) . 15 1.7 European Values Study (II) . 17 1.8 European Values Study (III) . 19 1.9 Health Surveys in Europe . 22 1.10 Issues in Business Survey Methodology . 25 1.11 Macro Mechanisms and Macro Hypotheses . 28 1.12 Measurement of Social Capital . 31 1.13 Measuring the Quality of Democracy by means of Survey Data . 33 1.14 Network Survey Measurement . 35 1.15 The study of left and right in political science . 38 1.16 Time use surveys: emerging issues (I) . 40 1.17 Time use surveys: emerging issues (II) . 42 1.18 Trust and Trustworthiness (I) . 43 1.19 Trust and Trustworthiness (II) . 45 2 Sampling and Nonresponse 47 2.1 New Challenges in Sampling (I) . 48 2.2 New Challenges in Sampling (II) . 51 2.3 New Challenges in Sampling (III) . 56 2.4 Nonresponse . 59 2.5 Selection Bias in Panel Research (I) . 63 2.6 Selection Bias in Panel Research (II) . 65 2.7 Strategies for Nonresponse Adjustments (I) . 67 2.8 Strategies for Nonresponse Adjustments (II) . 69 2.9 Understanding nonresponse and attrition: Research from the UK Survey De- sign and Measurement Initiative . 71 3 Data Archive Teaching 73 3.1 Access to Survey Data on the Internet (I) . 74 3.2 Access to Survey Data on the Internet (II) . 76 3.3 How to facilitate in order to compare - infrastructures for data cooperation . 78 3.4 Quality Enhancement in Repeated Surveys . 80 iii iv QUICK OVERVIEW 4 Design and Quality of Survey Questions 83 4.1 Can multiple question testing and evaluation methods improve survey questions or predict sources of measurement error? . 84 4.2 Implementation Issues in Internet-based Surveys . 88 4.3 Interviewer and Respondent Behaviour in Survey Interviews . 91 4.4 Methods and approaches for coding textual survey variables . 94 4.5 Methods of Evaluating the Quality of Data Collection in Surveys . 96 4.6 Questionnaire design in panel surveys . 98 4.7 Questionnaire Developing and Testing . 101 5 Adding Data to Surveys 105 5.1 Connecting data from independent surveys . 106 5.2 Media-reported events: the context of surveys . 108 6 Mode of Data Collection and Data Enhancement 111 6.1 Analysis and Evaluation of Survey Paradata . 112 6.2 Detecting and Adjusting for Nonresponse Bias using Contextual and Paradata . 115 6.3 Mobile Phones and other ICT in Survey Research: Implications for Data Quality 117 6.4 Use of the Internet and Mixed-Mode Surveys to Survey the General Public (I) . 119 6.5 Use of the Internet and Mixed-Mode Surveys to Survey the General Public (II) . 122 6.6 WEBSURVNET: Network on challenges in survey methodology for web surveys 123 7 Social Indicators 125 7.1 Comparative social surveys in Europe: issues in methodology and implemen- tation . 126 7.2 Economic indicators and indices . 129 7.3 Integration of objective and subjective indicators: methodological and technical issues . 131 7.4 Measuring Civil Society - What are the issues? . 134 7.5 Quality of measures for concepts of Social sciences (I) . 136 7.6 Quality of measures for concepts of Social sciences (II) . 138 7.7 Social Indicators of Trust in Criminal Justice . 140 8 Data Analysis 143 8.1 Analysis Strategies for Cross-Cultural Research . 144 8.2 Causal Analysis Using Multi-Wave Panel Data: Problems and Solutions . 147 8.3 Comparing and Evaluating Autoregressive, Latent Trajectory, Autoregressive Latent Trajectory, and Continuous Time ALT Models (I) . 149 8.4 Comparing and Evaluating Autoregressive, Latent Trajectory, Autoregressive Latent Trajectory, and Continuous Time ALT Models (II) . 151 8.5 IRT: Item Response Theory in Survey Methodology (I) . 153 8.6 IRT: Item Response Theory in Survey Methodology (II) . 156 8.7 Marginal models for dependent data . 159 8.8 Methodological Issues in Multilevel Analysis for Cross-national Research . 161 8.9 Testing Structural Equations Models . 164 9 Qualitative Methods 167 9.1 Advancements in Cognitive Testing Methodology . 168 9.2 Enhancing Survey Methodology with Qualitative Methods . 171 QUICK OVERVIEW v 9.3 Quantitative and qualitative approaches to validate psychological and educa- tional questionnaires in cross-cultural research . 174 10 Comparative Research 177 10.1 Comparing Social Survey Data in a Global Perspective. The cases of the CSES and the ISSP. 178 10.2 Designing and testing survey instruments for comparative research . 181 10.3 Investigating social change with surveys: problems of comparability, harmo- nization and cumulation . 183 10.4 Language, Communication, and Research in the Comparative Context . 187 10.5 Quality Monitoring Challenges in Cross-National Data Collection (I) . 189 10.6 Quality Monitoring Challenges in Cross-National Data Collection (II) . 191 11 Fieldwork Monitoring 193 11.1 Fieldwork monitoring . 194 11.2 Interviewers as Agents of Data Collection (I) . 196 11.3 Interviewers as Agents of Data Collection (II) . 198 11.4 Non-response bias in cross-national surveys: an evaluation of Designs for de- tection and adjustment (I) . 201 11.5 Non-response bias in cross-national surveys: an evaluation of Designs for de- tection and adjustment (II) . 203 12 Special Issues related to Survey Research 207 12.1 Analysing children born of war across time, nations and disciplines (I) . 208 12.2 Analysing children born of war across time, nations and disciplines (II) . 210 12.3 Climate Change Survey: substantive and methodological issues . 212 12.4 Cognition in survey research (I) . 214 12.5 Cognition in survey research (II) . 217 12.6 Data quality in surveys among the elderly . 219 12.7 Demonstrations of new resources . 221 12.8 Special Issues . 222 12.9 Surveying sensitive subjects . 225 Index of authors and coordinators 228 Chapter 1 Substantive Applications of Survey Methodology 1 2 CHAPTER 1. SUBSTANTIVE APPLICATIONS OF SURVEY METHODOLOGY 1.1 Analysing Attitudes Towards Migration with Large Compara- tive Survey Data (I) Coordinator: Marcel Coenders, University of Utrecht (Netherlands) 1.1.1 Anti-immigrant attitudes in a comparative perspective Marcel Coenders, University of Utrecht (Netherlands) 1.1.2 A comparative analysis of socialisation, context and individual effects on European attitudes to immigrant ethnic minorities Robert Ford, University of Manchester (United Kingdom) Abstract Mass migration to Europe is a historically recent phenomenon, having commenced within the past fifty years in all the countries which have experienced it. As a result, all of Europe?s diversifying societies contain cohorts who grew up in an ethnically more homogeneous, pre-migration society and cohorts who have grown up in a more diverse national (though not necessarily local) context since mass migration began. These differences in socialisation conditions could have an important impact on attitudes to minorities, analogous to the socialisation effects on attitudes found by researchers such as Mannheim (. However, cohort differences in attitudes towards minorities, and the socialisation effects which may produce them, have only been examined in individual country case studies. Ford (2008) finds evidence that cohorts socialised since mass migration began in Britain have become progressively less hostile to minorities, while Coenders et al (2008) find that in the Netherlands levels of migration and unemployment in youth have a lasting impact on attitudes to immigrant minorities. This paper seeks to extend these national studies into a comparative context, utilising data from the 2003 European Social Survey on Western European countries which have experienced large scale migration settlement from outside Europe. The analysis examines hostility to immigrant minorities, measured using items which identify discriminatory preferences in housing, employment and marriage and opposition to laws combating ethnic and racial discrimination. The cohort distribution of these discriminatory preferences in each country is examined and then multilevel models are constructed to test the impact of both present social and political conditions and the conditions prevalent during the respondent?s youth on these attitudes. The social conditions examined include the effects of contextual diversity, economic insecurity, and migration rates. The political conditions tested include the impact of incumbent governments pursuing restrictionist or assimilationist immigration policies and the effects of the presence of prominent anti-immigration political actors, such as extreme right parties or anti-immigration press campaigns. As well as these contextual factors, the impact of individual factors such as education, direct social contact with immigrant minorities, unemployment and social class are also examined. 1.1.3 Why Do ‘Good’ People Think That Immigrants are ‘Bad’? Florian Pichler, University of Surrey (United Kingdom) Abstract Media and academic research on attitudes towards immigrants suggest that anti-foreigner sentiments are part of everyday life in many European countries and become more and more presentable in all sorts of contexts, including politics. The causes of xenophobia, though very complex, are often identified in political orientations (e.g. leaning towards the far-right, authoritarian minds) and personal experiences (for instance, fears about social security) in the literature. Nevertheless, we know rather little about perceptions of the more specific perceived harm done to society by immigrants. Furthermore, it is not clear whether only bad people are against foreigners, where bad usually refers to right-wing party voters, holders of anti-democratic views or those opposing equality and integration. But what about anti-immigrant sentiments in general as these views become more widespread? Here, we also set out to portray good people and their views with respect to anti- immigrant sentiments.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Annual Report 2019
    Annual report 2019 . Leiden University . University of Amsterdam . University of Groningen . Tilburg University . University of Twente . Utrecht University . KUL University of Leuven . Statistics Netherlands (CBS) . Psychometric Research Center (Cito) IOPS Annual Report 2019 Contents 1 Foreword .................................................................................................................................. 1 2 Introduction ............................................................................................................................. 2 2.1 Background............................................................................................................... 2 2.2 Role of IOPS (contrasted with local graduate schools) ............................................ 2 2.3 Aims and activities of IOPS ....................................................................................... 3 2.3.1 Activities ........................................................................................................... 3 2.3.2 Quality of PhD research .................................................................................... 3 2.3.3 Connecting PhD students to the labour market ............................................... 3 2.4 Admittance to the IOPS postgraduate program ....................................................... 4 2.5 Affiliated student membership ................................................................................ 5 3 Organization ............................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Computer Assisted Self-Interviewing Tailored for Special Populations and Topics
    Computer Assisted Self-Interviewing 1 Edith D. de Leeuw, Joop J. Hox, & Sabina Kef (2003). Computer-assisted self-interviewing tailored for special populations and topics. A later version appeared in Field Methods, 15, 223-251. Computer Assisted Self-Interviewing Tailored for Special Populations and Topics Edith de Leeuw Methodika, Amsterdam Joop Hox Utrecht University Sabina Kef1 University of Amsterdam Abstract: Self-administered questionnaires have many advantages, especially when sensitive questions are asked. However, paper self-administered questionnaires have a serious drawback: only relatively simple questionnaires can be used. Computer Assisted Self-Interviewing (CASI) can overcome these problems, and make it possible to use very complex self-administered questionnaires. CASI can take several forms, for instance, it can be a part of a personal (CAPI) interview where the interviewer hands over the computer to the respondent for specific questions. Another form is a computerized version of the mail survey: Disk-by-Mail. We have used both forms in an application for very special populations (primary school children, visually impaired young adults, and parents and children from multi problem families, in which professional guidance for the family was sought). This paper provides an introduction to computer assisted self-interviewing (CASI) and reviews the advantages and disadvantages of CASI with special attention to data quality. We discus the advantages of CASI when investigating special groups and topics and provide general advice on how to tailor standard CASI procedures for surveys of special groups. Key words: sensitive questions, special groups, disk by mail, self-administered questionnaire, self-interviewing , CASI, ACASI 1 The authors thank Marion van Hattum of the Netherlands Institute for Care and Welfare (NIZW) for her enthusiastic assistance during the data collection and for her comments on earlier drafts.
    [Show full text]
  • Surveying Children: Cognitive Development and Response Quality in Questionnaire Research
    Bulletin de Méthodologie Sociologique (59 rue Pouchet, F 75017 Paris), April 2000, N. 66, pp. 60-75 Children as Respondents in Survey Research: Cognitive Development and Response Quality.1 by Natacha Borgers (University of Amsterdam, Faculty of Educational Sciences: [email protected]) Edith de Leeuw (MethodikA, Amsterdam, Netherlands: [email protected]) Joop Hox (Utrecht University, Utrecht, Netherlands: [email protected] Résumé: Les enfants comme répondants dans les enquêtes – Développement cognitiv et qualité des réponses. Quoique les enfants ne sont plus une population négligé des statistiques officièlles et des enquêtes, des études méethodologiques sur des enquêtes d’enfants sont rares. Les chercheirs doivent se baser sur les connaisances ad hoc venant des domaines aussi divers que la psychiatrie enfantine et les test d’éducation, ou extrapoler à partir de la connaisance méthodologique associée aux enquêtes auprès d’adultes. Dans cet article, les auteurs passant en revu la littérature scientifique disponible sur les enfants comme répondants, et présentent les résultats préliminaires d’une analyse secondaire de l’influence du développement cognitif sur la qualité des réponses. Enfin, il y a des recommandations concernants les enquêtes des enfants. Enfants, Développement cognitif, Qualité des données, Questionnaires, Entretiens. Abstract. Although children are no longer a neglected minority in official statistics and surveys, methodological knowledge on how to survey children is still scarce. Researchers have to rely mainly on ad-hoc knowledge from such diverse fields as child psychiatry and educational testing, or extrapolate from methodological knowledge on how to survey adults. In this article we review the available literature on children as respondents, and present the first results of a secondary analysis on the influence of cognitive development on response quality.
    [Show full text]
  • FLI-Nuclear-Open-Letter-Poster.Pdf
    Professor of Computer Science Curie Fellow, PostDoc Computing Science, Fellow, Sloan Foundation Nicolas Guiblin CentraleSupélec, Université de Paris-Saclay, lab Clancy William James ECAP, University of Erlangen-Nuremberg, of Electrical Engineering, Fellow, Institution of Engineers (India) and Bjorn Landfeldt Lund University, Professor of Electrical Engineering Immunology, FRS FMedSci Laureate in Physics Fellow, Association for Psychological Science Mingming Wu Cornell University, Professor of Biological and Phoebe C. Ellsworth UNiversity of Michigan, Professor of Psychology Technische Universität Vienna Vincent Craig Research School of Physics, Australian National Daniel Winkler David Duvenaud University of Toronto, Assistant Professor of engineer in X-ray diffraction Astroparticle physicist, 2010 Bragg Gold Medal winner Institution of Electronics and Telecommunication Engineers (IETE) Oscar Agertz Lund University, Assistant Professor in Astrophysics A David Caplin Imperial College London, Emeritus Professor of H. Robert Horvitz MIT, Professor of Biology, 2002 Nobel Prize in Seth Stein Northwestern University, Deering Professor of Earth & Environmental Engineering Janice R. Naegele Wesleyan University, Professor of Biology, Ryan Kiggins University of Central Oklahoma, Instructor of Political University, Professor of Physical Chemistry Ahmad Salti University of Innsbruck, Researcher in Molecular Computer Science Leonhard Neuhaus Laboratoire Kastler Brossel, PostDoc in physics Dmitry Malyshev Erlangen-Nuremberg University, Postdoc Dr. Kalyan
    [Show full text]
  • Improving Data Quality When Surveying Children and Adolescents: Cognitive and Social Development and Its Role in Questionnaire Construction and Pretesting
    Improving Data Quality when Surveying Children and Adolescents: Cognitive and Social Development and its Role in Questionnaire Construction and Pretesting Prof. Dr. Edith D. de Leeuw Department of Methodology and Statistics, Utrecht University (email: [email protected]) Report prepared for the Annual Meeting of the Academy of Finland: Research Programs Public Health Challenges and Health and Welfare of Children and Young People May 10-12 Naantali Finland Copyright Edith D. de Leeuw, 2011 Acknowledgements This report was developed in collaboration with Dr. Natacha Borgers and Professor dr Joop Hox, Utrecht University. Contact Address: Professor Dr. Edith. D. de Leeuw Plantage Doklaan 40 Nl-1018 CN Amsterdam, The Netherlands e-mail: [email protected] 2 Content Preface Executive Summary Introduction Part 1: Construction of Questionnaires Comprehension and Interpretation of Questions Comprehension and Structure Language and Readability Wording: Intended and Literal Meaning Information Retrieval from Memory Memory Capacity Retrospective Questions Diaries Memory Capacity versus Processing Speed Judgment: Information Integration and Evaluation Social desirability and Pleasing Self-concept and Peer Pressure Reporting: Comprehension and Selection of Response Options Response Options: Number and Label Summary Part 1 3 Part 2: Pretesting of Questionnaires Why Pretesting Focus Groups Focus Groups with Children and Adolescents 1. Group Size 2. Group Homogeneity 3. Duration 4. General setting In-depth or Cognitive Interviews for Testing Questionnaires
    [Show full text]
  • Retrospective Data Collection in Europe
    INTERVIEWER EFFECTS ON NONRESPONSE IN THE EUROPEAN SOCIAL SURVEY Annelies G. Blom, Edith D. de Leeuw, Joop J. Hox 202-2010 Interviewer Effects on Nonresponse in the European Social Survey Annelies G. Blom1, Edith D. de Leeuw and Joop J. Hox2 Abstract In face-to-face surveys interviewers play a crucial role in making contact with and gaining cooperation from sample units. While some analyses investigate the influence of interviewers on nonresponse, they are typically restricted to single-country studies. However, interviewer training, contacting and cooperation strategies as well as survey climates may differ across countries. Combining call-record data from the European Social Survey (ESS) with data from a detailed interviewer questionnaire on attitudes and doorstep behavior we find systematic country differences in nonresponse processes, which can in part be explained by differences in interviewer characteristics, such as contacting strategies and avowed doorstep behavior. Keywords: Contact, cooperation, interviewer attitudes, doorstep behavior, interviewer questionnaire, paradata, contact data, cross-cultural research, international surveys. JEL codes: C81, C83 Acknowledgements Authors are listed in alphabetical order. The authors would like to thank Heikki Ervasti (Finland), Lilli Japec (Sweden), Dominique Joye (Switzerland), Geert Loosveldt (Belgium), Peer Scheepers and Frans Louwen (the Netherlands), Katarina Thomson and Peter Lynn (UK), Pawel Sztabinski (Poland), and Jorge Vala (Portugal) for their enthusiastic support in translating and implementing the interviewer questionnaire in their countries. 1 Corresponding author: Mannheim Research Institute for the Economics of Aging (MEA), Mannheim University, 68131 Mannheim, Germany. Email: [email protected] 2 Department of Methodology and Statistics, Utrecht University, Post Box 80.140, 3508 TC Utrecht, Netherlands.
    [Show full text]
  • Curriculum Vitae
    DON A. DILLMAN 133 Wilson Hall, PO Box 644014, Pullman, WA 99164-4014 | 509-335-1511 | [email protected] EDUCATION Iowa State University B.S. in Agronomy 1964 Iowa State University M.S. in Rural Sociology 1966 Iowa State University Ph.D. in Sociology 1969 Minor: Political Science AWARDS Fellow, Kellogg National Fellowship Program 1980 – 1983 Certificate for Outstanding Service to the Rural Sociological Society for co-editing, Rural Society in the U.S.: Issues for the 1980’s 1983 M. E. John, Invited lecture, Pennsylvania State University. 1983 President, Rural Sociological Society (of America). 1983 – 1984 Washington State University Distinguished Faculty Address. 1985 Guest Professor, ZUMA/Zentrum Fur Umfragen Methoden Und Analysen (Center for Survey Methods and Analysis), Mannheim, West Germany 1985 – 1987 Elected Fellow, American Association for the Advancement of Science 1987 USDA, National Rural Development Advisory Council. 1987 – 1989 Instructor, 41st-52nd Summer Institutes, Survey Research Techniques, Institute for Social Research, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor. 1988 – 1999 Advisory Panel to U.S. Office of Technology Assessment Study on Rural Telecommunications and Economic Development. 1989 – 1990 Advisor, Group 11, Kellogg National Fellowship Program. 1989 – 1993 Designation of Mail and Telephone Surveys: The Total Design Method as a Citation Classic by the Institute for Scientific Information in recognition of citation in over 340 publications (through 2012 it has been cited more than 10,000 times) 1990 Outstanding achievement citation and plaque from The Boeing Company, Seattle, Washington, to the Social and Economic Sciences Research Center for development of employee survey processes to measure company accomplishment of strategic objectives (team leader of consultation group which included M.
    [Show full text]
  • Annual Report 2018
    Annual report 2018 . Leiden University . University of Amsterdam . University of Groningen . Tilburg University . University of Twente . Utrecht University . KUL University of Leuven . Statistics Netherlands (CBS) . Psychometric Research Center (Cito) IOPS Annual Report 2018 Contents Foreword ................................................................................................................................................. 1 1 Introduction ..................................................................................................................................... 2 1.1 Background .............................................................................................................................. 2 1.2 Role of IOPS (contrasted with local graduate schools)............................................................ 2 1.3 Aims and activities of IOPS ...................................................................................................... 3 1.3.1 Activities .......................................................................................................................... 3 1.3.2 Quality of PhD research ................................................................................................... 3 1.3.3 Connecting PhD students to the labour market .............................................................. 3 1.4 Admittance to the IOPS postgraduate program ..................................................................... 4 1.5 Affiliated student membership ..............................................................................................
    [Show full text]