ArticlePloS one2026
"Please speak in Hindi": Cognitive interviews to improve measurement of digital access in North India.
Article in PloS one, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
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.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Access to and use of mobile phones are increasingly a prerequisite for full participation in modern society. Yet, a significant digital gender gap persists in India, where women are less likely than men to own phones or access the internet. To measure and understand this gap, survey questions must be both comprehensible to the respondents and contextually appropriate. We conducted 101 cognitive interviews with men (n = 44) and women (n = 57) in rural Uttar Pradesh to test 118 draft survey questions developed for an upcoming survey on digital access and use. These draft questions were drawn primarily from validated global instruments, with some additional questions newly developed by our team, and were all translated into Hindi. Through team debriefs and systematic analysis of the interview transcripts, we identified seven categories of question problems: (1) inappropriate terminology, (2) overly complex wording, (3) low resonance of digital concepts (e.g., personal data, online tracking, privacy policies, hacking), (4) confusion when asking about permission and supervision of mobile phone use due to phone sharing and overlap with concept of help or support, (5) problematic question structures and response options (especially Likert scales), (6) self-practice bias, and (7) unclear time frames and recall expectations. Overall, we found that many draft survey questions were incomprehensible to respondents despite our research team's efforts to develop clear and simple translations. Revisions were required for almost all questions. Our findings highlight the critical role of cognitive interviewing in improving data quality, particularly when conducting surveys across languages and sociocultural contexts, and amid rapidly changing digital landscapes.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.