
@article{ref1,
title="Reports of alcohol-related harm: telephone versus face-to-face interviews",
journal="Journal of studies on alcohol",
year="2001",
author="Midanik, L. T. and Greenfield, T. K. and Rogers, J. D.",
volume="62",
number="1",
pages="74-78",
abstract="OBJECTIVE: To assess the effect of mode of administration in alcohol surveys (telephone vs face-to-face interviews), prevalence rates of self-reported harms due to alcohol were compared for two datasets with equivalent measures. METHOD: Two national alcohol surveys were used: the 1990 Warning Labels Survey, in which random digit dialing was used to generate a sample of 2,000 adults interviewed by telephone, and the 1990 National Alcohol Survey (face-to-face interviews), a probability sample of U.S. adults living in households (N = 2,058). Both surveys included identical items on five areas of alcohol-related harm, yielding one composite index of any harm reported in the last 12 months that was compared between the two surveys for current drinkers. RESULTS: After controlling for demographic characteristics and alcohol use, the telephone survey yielded significantly higher rates of alcohol-related health harm, work harm and &quot;any harm&quot; as compared to the in-person survey. The interaction between heavier drinking (five or more drinks during 1 day, weekly or more often) and method of data collection was significant for health harm and any harm. Respondents in the telephone survey who drank 5+ less than weekly were more likely than those interviewed in person to report health harm due to alcohol use; those in the telephone survey who drank 5+ weekly or more often were more likely to report any harm. CONCLUSIONS: Possible explanations for differences between the surveys include anonymity and fewer social desirability issues associated with telephone surveys, as well as potentially differing cognitive requirements in telephone versus face-to-face interviews.<p /><p>Language: en</p>",
language="en",
issn="0096-882X",
doi="",
url="http://dx.doi.org/"
}