Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33834250›Full record

Trial reportDemography2021

You Know What I Know: Interviewer Knowledge Effects in Subjective Expectation Elicitation.

Jason T Kerwin, Natalia Ordaz Reynoso

Abstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Trial report in Demography, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Jason T KerwinDepartment of Applied Economics and Minnesota Population Center, University of Minnesota, Saint Paul, MN, USA.
Natalia Ordaz ReynosoDepartment of Applied Economics and Minnesota Population Center, University of Minnesota, Saint Paul, MN, USA.

Funding

TRAINING IN THE DEMOGRAPHY OF AGINGT32AG000221 · NIA · UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN AT ANN ARBOR · PI Sarah A. Burgard · 1992 to 2026
$15.3M
TRAINING IN SOCIAL AND ECONOMIC DEMOGRAPHYT32HD007339 · NICHD · UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN AT ANN ARBOR · PI Sarah A. Burgard · 1987 to 2026
$14.9M
Minnesota Population Center Science and Technical CoreP2CHD041023 · NICHD · UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA · PI THERESA LOUISE OSYPUK · 2016 to 2026
$4.3M
Spatial Analysis CoreR24HD041023 · NICHD · UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA TWIN CITIES · PI FITCH, CATHERINE A · 2001 to 2016
$4.1M
NIA NIH HHS T32 AG000221NICHD NIH HHS P2C HD041023NICHD NIH HHS R24 HD041023
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Directly eliciting individuals' subjective beliefs via surveys is increasingly popular in social science research, but doing so via face-to-face surveys has an important downside: the interviewer's knowledge of the topic may spill over onto the respondent's recorded beliefs. Using a randomized experiment that used interviewers to implement an information treatment, we show that reported beliefs are significantly shifted by interviewer knowledge. Trained interviewers primed respondents to use the exact numbers used in the training, nudging them away from higher answers; recorded responses decreased by about 0.3 standard deviations of the initial belief distribution. Furthermore, respondents with stronger prior beliefs were less affected by interviewer knowledge. We suggest corrections for this issue from the perspectives of interviewer recruitment, survey design, and experiment setup.

Indexed as

MotivationHumansSurveys and QuestionnairesInterviewer effectsRisk beliefsSpilloversSubjective expectationsSurvey methodology

Identifiers

PMID33834250
PMCPMC8041053

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.