|
Field
Abstract
|
Before
We test an alternative survey method to the standard face-to-face interview, which we call in-group individual survey, in which respondents are grouped together and answer questions posed by a common enumerator directly on a tablet provided to them. We use a randomized control trial design in which the same questionnaire is randomly administered either in-group or on a one-to-one basis. We compare the relative performance of the two methods to examine whether the in-group survey: 1) elicits different responses to sensitive questions; 2) is less subject to enumerator bias; 3) generates some within-group conformity bias; 4) is less costly; and 5) raises specific technical issues.
|
After
While the process of data collection can lead to bias, little empirical evidence investigates the role of the survey method. In this paper, we compare two survey methods: the standard face-to-face interview and an alternative method we call Human-Assisted Self-Administered survey (HASA). In the latter, respondents are guided by an enumerator reading questions, but they answer privately on an electronic device. Taking advantage of an RCT in Benin, we randomize the survey method across respondents. We show that the survey method leads to different results depending on enumerator influence. Identifying this influence, we document that variables that are likely to be influenced by enumerators differ systematically across survey methods. Interestingly, these variables are mainly related to gender norms and women agency. We find that respondents who answer directly on a tablet report less gender-equal values. Investigating the mechanisms, we show that social desirability bias affects responses in face-to-face interviews.
|