Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

Click here for more information on Research and Evaluation in Education and Psychology, 3e

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
Educational and Psychological Measurement
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow References
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Right arrow Citing Articles via Scopus
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Millstein, S. G.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati   Add to Twitter  
What's this?

Acceptability and Reliability of Sensitive Information Collected via Computer Interview

Susan G. Millstein

Department of Pediatrics, University of California, San Francisco

The current study examined response bias in 108 female adolescents randomly assigned to one of three groups: (1) interactive computer interview, (2) face-to-face interview, or (3) self-administered questionnaire. Subjects interviewed by computer enjoyed the survey more than subjects in other groups; subjects completing questionnaires gave the least positive evaluations (p < .001). Results showed no significant differences between subjects in the three groups on reports of sexual behavior, substance use or symptomatology. Reporting of affective states differed by groups (p < .001); subjects in the computer group were more willing to acknowledge having positive affect than subjects in other groups. Current interest in the use of computers in clinical settings must be supported by controlled investigations of the validity of computer acquired information.

Educational and Psychological Measurement, Vol. 47, No. 2, 523-533 (1987)
DOI: 10.1177/0013164487472028
Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Complore Complore   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 Educational and Psychological MeasurementHome page
K. Mueller, C. Liebig, and K. Hattrup
Computerizing Organizational Attitude Surveys: An Investigation of the Measurement Equivalence of a Multifaceted Job Satisfaction Measure
Educational and Psychological Measurement, August 1, 2007; 67(4): 658 - 678.
[Abstract] [PDF]

Home page
 Am J EpidemiolHome page
D. S. Metzger, B. Koblin, C. Turner, H. Navaline, F. Valenti, S. Holte, M. Gross, A. Sheon, H. Miller, P. Cooley, et al.
Randomized Controlled Trial of Audio Computer-assisted Self-Interviewing: Utility and Acceptability in Longitudinal Studies
Am. J. Epidemiol., July 15, 2000; 152(2): 99 - 106.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Criminal Justice and BehaviorHome page
K. M. BROOME, K. KNIGHT, G. W. JOE, and D. D. SIMPSON
Evaluating the Drug-Abusing Probationer: Clinical Interview Versus Self-Administered Assessment
Criminal Justice and Behavior, December 1, 1996; 23(4): 593 - 606.
[Abstract]

Home page
 American Behavioral ScientistHome page
P. ROSENFELD, S. BOOTH-KEWLEY, and J. E. EDWARDS
Computer-Administered Surveys in Organizational Settings: Alternatives, Advantages, and Applications
American Behavioral Scientist, March 1, 1993; 36(4): 485 - 511.