Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41953102›Full record

ArticleMethoden, daten, analysen2025

Probing in Cognitive Interviews can Promote Acquiescence.

Frederick G Conrad, Rachel E Davis, Carolyn Lau, Melissa Armendáriz, Stephanie Morales, Timothy P Johnson, Johnny Blair

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Methoden, daten, analysen, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing 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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

7 authors.

Frederick G ConradUniversity of Michigan.
Rachel E DavisUniversity of South Carolina.
Carolyn LauPew Research.
Melissa ArmendárizUniversity of Michigan.
Stephanie MoralesUniversity of Michigan.
Timothy P JohnsonUniversity of Illinois at Chicago.
Johnny BlairIndependent consultant.

Funding

Addressing acquiescence: Reducing survey error to promote Latino healthR01CA172283 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF SOUTH CAROLINA AT COLUMBIA · PI DAVIS, RACHEL ELLEN · 2013 to 2017
$2.6M
NCI NIH HHS R01 CA172283
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Cognitive interviewing is widely used to pretest survey questionnaires and is considered a best practice (e.g., Willis, 2005, 2018; Beatty & Willis, 2007). However, the method has been controversial because, among other concerns, it requires interviewers to probe respondents for more detail or clarity about their experience answering draft survey questions which may lead them to report "problems" they have not actually experienced (e.g., Conrad & Blair, 2009). The present study investigates this possibility from the perspective of Acquiescent Response Style (ARS) - the tendency for survey respondents to select positive responses such as "yes" or "strongly agree," irrespective of the question's content (e.g., Baumgartner & Steenkamp, 2001). For example, respondents in a cognitive interview might affirm experiencing a problem mentioned in or implied by an interviewer's probe even if they have not actually experienced it. We embedded a probing experiment in a cognitive interview pretest of a health survey in which respondents participated in cognitive interviews that used either

Indexed as

acquiescent response styleaffirmation biascognitive interviewsdirective probesverbal probes

Identifiers

PMID41953102
PMCPMC13055928

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.