THE VALIDITY OF SCHEDULE ENTRIES.

This article examines the validity of schedule entries in interviews and surveys as of September 1936. Data secured by interview or survey are subject to three major classes of error: inaccurate or biased responses of the people interviewed, misinterpretation or inaccurate recording by the interview...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Publicado en:Sociology & Social Research Vol. 21; no. 1; pp. 40 - 45
Autor principal: Beers, Howard W.
Formato: Artículo
Publicado: University of Southern California Sep/Oct1936
Materias:
Acceso en línea:Ver este registro en EBSCOhost
fields @attributes:
  recordID: 1
pdfLink:
plink: https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=hlh&AN=17289718&site=ehost-live
header:
  @attributes:
    shortDbName: hlh
    uiTerm: 17289718
    longDbName: Humanities International Complete
    uiTag: AN
  controlInfo:
    bkinfo:
    jinfo:
      jid:
        00380393
        SOS
      jtl: Sociology & Social Research
      issn: 00380393
      maglogo: N
    pubinfo:
      dt: Sep/Oct1936
      vid: 21
      iid: 1
      pid: 364
      pub: University of Southern California
    artinfo:
      ui: 17289718
      ppf: 40
      ppct: 5
      formats:
      tig:
        atl: THE VALIDITY OF SCHEDULE ENTRIES.
      aug:
        au: Beers, Howard W.
        affil: Cornell University
      su:
        Reliability (Personality trait)
        Surveys
        Interviewing
        Errors
        Sociology
      sug:
        subj:
          Reliability (Personality trait)
          Surveys
          Interviewing
          Errors
          Sociology
      ab: This article examines the validity of schedule entries in interviews and surveys as of September 1936. Data secured by interview or survey are subject to three major classes of error: inaccurate or biased responses of the people interviewed, misinterpretation or inaccurate recording by the interviewer or enumerator, and sampling error. The first of these classes can be minimized by the use of simple and objective questions, or by internal schedule checks. The third is usually estimated from probability theorems. The second is frequently ignored. Errors of interpretation and schedule entry are especially important, however, and doubtless have been overlooked in many studies that were thereby rendered actually invalid. Records of quantitative reports, or 'yes' and 'no' statements can be expected to have high accuracy. It is concluded, therefore, that some instruction of recorders increased the proportion of agreement by approximately 10 percent. It is apparent, therefore, that workers sent out for survey work or interviewing must be carefully drilled. The fact that a small amount of instruction can influence so markedly the validity of schedule entries merits careful attention during a period when many hastily organized and rather extensive surveys are being conducted.
      pubtype: Academic Journal
      doctype: Article
      src: R
    language: English
    refInfo:
    copyright:
      @attributes:
        flag: Y
      dt:
        @attributes:
          year: 1936
    holdings:
      @attributes:
        islocal: N