Refusals: Who, Where and Why

Abstract

The characteristics of a very small group of people who refused to participate in a personal interview panel study are investigated in this article. Comparisons are made between characteristics of respondents and refusers in the initial interview and subsequent interviews. Details of the refusal situation and reasons given by refusers for their noncooperation are also discussed. Theresa J. DeMaio is a survey statistician at the U.S. Bureau of the Census. The author wishes to acknowledge the assistance of her coworkers at the Bureau, in particular Naomi D. Rothwell, who designed and made arrangements for the reports on which this paper is based, and who critically reviewed drafts of it. Public Opinion Quarterly ? 1980 by The Trustees of Columbia University Published by Elsevier North Holland, Inc. 0033-362X/80/0044-223/$1.75 This content downloaded from 207.46.13.157 on Thu, 09 Jun 2016 06:53:38 UTC All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms 224 THERESA J. DE MAIO sons are more likely to refuse than their counterparts. On the other hand, he found no substantial difference on the basis of either sex or income in a one-time survey conducted by the University of Michigan. Concern at the Census Bureau about potential nonresponse bias has led to studies of nonrespondent characteristics and the effect of their exclusion on survey results. Unlike previous research, however, these attempts are successful in obtaining information about a national cross-section of nonrespondents. Until now, investigation of the refusal component of nonresponse has been limited to those noncooperative households for which some information has already been obtained-i.e., respondents in panel surveys who refused after having been previously cooperative. This research (Palmer, 1966) showed that, although the characteristics of nonrespondents as a whole biased the survey estimates, there were no differences between the small group of refusers (who had previously cooperated) and cooperative respondents in the Current Population Survey. However, Palmer described her inability to provide information about an appreciable proportion of refusals as a major limitation of the findings. Studies of refusals are important not only to determine what biases exist but also to see whether knowledge about refusers might suggest appeals and procedures to reduce their numbers. Accordingly, a project was undertaken which had two main purposes: to learn about characteristics of refusers in households which have not been interviewed before, and to explore the role of the Privacy Act with regard to refusal rates (which have increased from 1 percent in the 1960s to the present 3 percent in the Current Populafion Survey). The Privacy Act requires explicit notification of potential respondents that participation in the survey is voluntary, and that no penalties are involved in refusal. In order to assess the prominence of the Privacy Act as a factor in refusals, information was collected from refusers about their reasons for noncooperation. To date, little systematic research has been conducted on this important topic.

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 167 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.