7.

INSTRUMENT DEVELOPMENT (ASKING THE RIGHT QUESTIONS AND INTERVIEWING TECHNIQUES)

Outline 7.1 Instrument development Issues to be considered 7.2 Minimising measurement error 7.3 Testing and validation of survey instruments (including information on testing international disability question sets in local environment) Pre-testing Pre-testing techniques Other techniques Pre-testing strategies Field testing 7.4 Interviewing people with disabilities Stereotypes and myths about people with disabilities Disability language Cultural issues The interview 7.1 Instrument development

Instrument development vital in achievement of quality data. Disability instruments difficult to develop. Measurement of disability is subjective and very difficult to get high quality responses with a small number of short interview questions. Operationalising the concept to be measured into survey question is difficult and requires significant development and testing. It is a good practice to start with an already developed instrument designed to measure the same concept and test it in the local environment. Data from any survey only as good as the survey instrument. Ask poor questions or dont train interviewers well then get poor results. Important to test instruments in local environment to ensure that the concepts and language understood and acceptable in own country. Want survey responses to be Valid measure what they say they measure Reliable report the same result when administered again. Problem with disability data. Not necessarily measuring what you think you are. And then, even comprehensive measures might not be highly reliable.

Measurement of disability slightly subjective, depending upon who is being interviewed, context of disability questions, the health status of the person. Repeat measures over time especially susceptible to changes in perception of disability status because of changes in underlying health condition. Issues to be considered Language Language is a factor that needs to be borne in mind when developing questions and undertaking surveys to identify people with disabilities. It is important that the words that are used are acceptable to the people who identify with those words. The existence of different perspectives between different groups in the population, such as between generations or ethnic groups, can be a barrier to the consistent measurement of disability. For example, whereas the word 'handicap' might be acceptable to many older people, many younger people find it offensive. Language is often at the forefront of the battles by individual groups to change social perceptions of the group and their situation. People resist being labeled and slotted into boxes. In New Zealand, referring to people with disabilities as 'disabled people' or 'handicapped' is regarded as offensive. If respondents are upset and antagonised because of the use of language that they find offensive for whatever reason, they are less likely to complete the survey. Thus, response rates will be affected. The issue of language is therefore important, and should be addressed both in developing the survey questions and also in training the interviewers, if the collection is interviewer administered. Testing disability questions in the lead up to the 2001 Australian Census showed that using the term mental condition in the question significantly reduced the numbers of people prepared to identify as having a disability, especially among older Australians. Pre-testing of questionnaires can provide information on the acceptability of the language to respondents. It is also a good check on whether people are embarrassed or insulted by the questions. Pre-testing the questionnaire means that time is spent trying out the interview and observing the interview as it occurs. Notes are taken and summarised by the person doing the interview about the way in which the way in which the questions were received, misunderstandings that occurred, and language that was not understood Summary of issues in instrument devt? Is it worthwhile having a summary of attributes of good survey questions? Threshold issues interpretation of difficulty Three point response scales Refer to question type discussion in Section 4.2.
2

7.2

Minimising measurement error

Suggest drop this sub-section as mostly covered in chap 6. Could cover measurement error associated with respondent, interviewer, instrument and the interaction between them in 6. 7.3 Testing and validation of survey instruments (including information on testing international disability question sets in local environment)

Check information from WG 4 on implementation of draft question set in countries. Probably need to include information from the paper or references in the update of this manual. It is good statistical practice to thoroughly test survey instruments well before the main survey. A relatively small amount of resources spent on testing potentially saves a large amount of resources when errors or problems are detected and corrected before the main survey. At the extreme end of the scale, systematic errors which are not corrected at the testing stage of the survey development and get through to the final survey, have the potential to make the survey unfit for the purposes that it was designed for. Thorough testing minimises bias in collections (through the identification and reduction of non-sample errors) and also provides useful management information to plan the survey. Forms of testing There are a variety of techniques available for testing survey instruments. The survey development team should put together a testing strategy designed to meet the particular circumstances of the survey. Testing techniques can involve either pretesting or field-testing. Pre-testing involves investigation of possible data quality issues and the identification of ways to minimise identified sources of non-sample error. Field testing, also called pilot testing, is conducted after the pre-testing has produced a questionnaire that is ready to be tested systematically on a set of respondents. The last test is the Dress Rehearsal, which is a full test of the survey instrument and full survey procedures, such as training manuals, processing survey data etc. The Dress Rehearsal provides information on interview time, and can be used to fine tune the survey cost estimates, and refine the sample size to fit a fixed budget if needed. Pre-testing Pre-testing refers to a range of testing techniques that are used prior to field testing to identify and potentially reduce non-sample errors. Types of non-sample errors that can be addressed using pre-testing include:



Respondent biases which arise from interpretation of the questions and the cognitive processes undertaken in answering the questions Interviewer effects, arising from the interviewer's ability to consistently deliver the questions as worded Mode effects, caused by the design and method of delivery of the survey instrument, and the Interaction effects between these.

While questionnaire pre-testing provides a means to reduce errors by improving survey questions, it cannot eliminate all errors in survey data. The techniques described below involve use convenience, or purposive sampling, rather than strict probability sampling. While pre-testing identifies issues which exist within the broader population which may affect data quality, techniques which use probability sampling are required to provide information about the magnitude of the effects these issues will have on the final data. Pre-testing techniques The most common pre-testing techniques used by national statistical organisations are focus groups and cognitive studies. These and other pre-testing techniques are discussed below. Focus groups Focus groups are an informal discussion on an issue or topic, led by a moderator or facilitator, with a small group of people from the survey population. Focus groups are used early in development to explore conceptual issues relevant to specific subpopulations. They can be used to: Determine the feasibility of conducting the survey Develop survey objectives or data requirements Determine data availability and record keeping practices Explore and define concepts Clarify reference periods Evaluate respondent understanding of language and terminology, and Evaluate alternative question wording or formats and to understand respondent burden

Through focus groups, survey developers can identify specific terminology, definitions and concepts used by respondents and can identify potential problems with data availability and intended collection methodologies. They assist survey developers to better understand the range of attitudes or understanding and the complexity of the task for respondents. Focus groups are particularly useful because they allow a small or 'rare' segment of the population to be tested that is likely to be under-represented in a larger field test. They are generally unsuitable for highly sensitive or emotive topics as biases in intra4

group behaviour are likely to distort information and there is a tendency for participants to give 'public' opinions. Focus groups are especially useful in testing disability questions because groups of people with particular types of disabilities (sometimes quite rare populations) can be used to provide feedback from their particular perspective. For example, focus groups have been used extensively in testing the disability questions for the Australian Population Census. Groups of older persons, people with physical disabilities, intellectual disabilities and carers of people with disabilities were separately convened to test the question sets. The focus groups identified problems with language in some questions and highlighted some concepts that were not well understood or interpreted inconsistently. They clearly demonstrated that some of the screening questions were not consistently interpreted as expected. For example, one question tested was, Does a physical or mental condition or health problem (lasting 6 months or more) reduce the amount or kind of activity this person can do? A number of people who simply could not do an activity because of their long-term health condition did not respond positively to the question, because they did not see not being able to do something as a reduction in activity. Cognitive interviews A cognitive interview is an in depth one-on-one interview in which trained cognitive interviewers ask volunteer participants probing questions about the survey questions being tested. Cognitive testing can be an iterative process, in which interviewers conduct a number of rounds of interviews, allowing for changes in the aims of the testing, the questions tested and the scripted probes between each round. The ABS usually conducts between twelve and fifteen interviews per round, to ensure sufficient data is gathered. Cognitive interviews are directed at understanding the cognitive processes the respondent engages in when answering a question. Using a multi-stage model of information processing, cognitive interviewing allows survey developers to identify and classify difficulties respondents may have according to whether the source of non-sample error occurs in question comprehension, recall of information, answer formation or providing a response. As well, cognitive interviews can provide information on adverse respondent reactions to sensitive or difficult questions. Specifically, this technique is used to assess how respondents formulate answers and understand questions and concepts, the range of likely answers to a question and the level of knowledge needed to answer a question accurately. Thus, this technique allows both the source of, and reason for, an error in the questionnaire to be identified. Interviewers prepare scripted protocols, which contain probing questions, explanations of the respondent's task and debriefing information. Interviewers also need to be skilled in forming and asking spontaneous probing questions based on information gained through the conversation and through aural and non-verbal cues.

Cognitive interviewing can also incorporate a number of other techniques to increase the range of information that can be obtained from an interview. Three techniques commonly used by the ABS are paraphrasing, vignettes and card sort tasks: Paraphrasing involves asking the respondent to repeat the question in his or her own words. This allows the researcher to understand how the respondent interpreted the question and whether this interpretation is consistent with the researcher's expectations. Paraphrasing can also suggest alternative and more consistently understood question wording. Vignettes involve having the participant respond to a question, or series of questions, from the point of view of a hypothetical situation. This allows interviewers to explore participants' response processes in situations in which the participant may not have direct experience. This technique is especially useful in gathering additional information about understanding of concepts, and calculation or construction of responses. Card sorting tasks provide interviewers with information about how respondents think about categories, group information or define particular concepts. This information is obtained by asking respondents to sort through a list of words, or concepts, according to whether they are representative or not representative of a particular concept. In particular, card sorting tasks provide interviewers with a better understanding of what respondents included or excluded when answering a survey question of the format.

(Add note about use in disability testing?) Cognitive interviews are usually filmed and limited to about 1-1.5 hours per interview, due to both interviewer and participant fatigue. Other pretesting techniques Literature reviews Expert reviews are where a group of survey design 'experts' critically appraise a questionnaire to identify potential sources of non-sample error by understanding the respondent's task and to provide suggestions for ways to minimise potential error. The experts systematically analyse the response task for each question in terms of comprehension, information retrieval, judgement and response generation. Interviewer debriefings combine standardised interviewer debriefing questionnaires and focus group style interviews to gather information from interviewers about a survey instrument. They can also be used after field tests and/or after data collection to provide information for later stages of survey development and future iterations of the survey. Observational interviews are commonly used to test and evaluate self-completion forms. In an observational interview, a trained observer watches the survey process under study (eg: form completion or responses within an interview) to better

understand the respondent's thought processes during survey administration. They aim to identify problems in wording, problems in question order, presentation or layout, and to estimate the time taken to complete the questionnaire or parts of the questionnaire. In behaviour coding, trained coders systematically assess respondent and interviewer behaviour during an interview according to a predetermined list of behaviours, to identify errors. It is based on a model whereby any deviation from the questionnaire by the interviewer, or any less than complete answer by the respondent, indicates a problem with the questionnaire. How to select a pre-testing strategy Given the wide range of techniques available to survey developers, survey researchers need to select the right combination of techniques to achieve the objectives of testing, within the available resources. Each technique is appropriate to particular circumstances, with the strengths of each technique complementing each other at different points in the questionnaire development process. There are a number of factors the ABS takes into consideration when planning a pretesting strategy for a given survey development project. These include: Resources Cost Labour intensity Timeliness of results Stage of development process Aims of test Type of errors to be identified

Table 7.1 lists the magnitude of resources required for each of the pre-testing techniques as well as relative timeliness of testing results and the stage of development process the technique is used. Table 7.1 Selected attributes of pre-testing techniques Technique Cognitive Interviews Focus Groups Interviewer Debriefing Expert Review Literature Review Behaviour Coding Observational Interviews Resources High Medium Medium Low Low High High Timeliness of results Fast Fast Fast Fast Moderate Slow Moderate Stage of development process Middle Start/early Start/early Early Start Later Middle

Resource issues and the objectives of testing are the main factors that should be taken into consideration when designing a pre-testing strategy. A pre-testing strategy should combine a number of techniques to optimise the chances of identifying and minimising as many potential sources of non-sample error as possible. In practice this means taking into account the mode of the final survey at some time in the testing process. Simulating the final mode of administration is important when finalising the questionnaire for field tests, but less important during early stages of pre-testing, where the focus in on looking for broader comprehension and response errors. While there is a wide range of techniques available for use in pre-testing surveys, some methods are used frequently. Interviewer debriefings, cognitive interviewing and focus groups are the most common pre-testing techniques used by the ABS for testing disability surveys. Other testing techniques There are also techniques that are conceptually half way between pre-tests and fieldtests. They are either small scale field tests or qualitative components of field tests: a. Skirmishes Skirmishes test two or three narrowly defined aspects of a survey, such as the effectiveness of introductory letters or a specific field procedure. They are small field studies which typically use about 150-200 completed questionnaires. b. Respondent debriefings These are conducted after a skirmish or field test and involve a focus group style, structured discussion. They can provide information about reasons for respondent misunderstandings, as well as information about particular aspects of the survey, such as respondent's use of records to answer survey questions. c. Follow-up questions This technique, sometimes called a post enumeration study, involves asking additional questions to respondents at the time the survey is administered. The aim of these extra questions is to provide additional information for validation of data items or to probe for a range or explanation of response alternatives. Follow up questions focus on respondents' thought processes as they completed the survey. This information might be useful in suggesting what facets of the issue respondents are considering when responding to the question. Follow-up questions have been used in Australian tests of the disability question set for the Population Census. The follow-up questions have asked probing questions to attempt to identify respondent understanding of questions. Field Testing Pilot testing and Dress Rehearsals
8

What information can they provide? How to conduct? Objectives are to test: Questions / instrument design Written instructions for interviewers Interviewer training manuals and delivery of training Timing/costing of survey Processing systems

In Australia, usually use a sample size of about 300 households in pilot tests and 8-12 interviewers Evaluation conducted after each test After final survey Based on qualitative and quantitative data Used as input to next development cycle 7.4 Interviewing People with Disabilities

There are a range of issues that interviewers should be aware of when conducting disability surveys or interviewing people with disabilities, in order to interview people with disabilities in a professional and sensitive manner. It is useful for interviewers to have an understanding of disabling factors including the myths and stereotypes about people with disabilities, the lack of role models for people with disabilities, disabling language and cross cultural issues. Stereotypes and myths about people with disabilities This section contains references to stereotypes, myths and generalisations of people with disabilities that are sometimes referred to in a range of situations. Like many generalisations, they are often grossly exaggerated and many are baseless. Many of the generalisations are negative and paint a less than realistic view of the characteristics and aspirations of people with disabilities. Society perpetuates these myths and assumptions through: Advertising & the media Language Jokes Social policy Charities and paternalism Films and novels Fear of the unknown

Religion Social isolation (lack of contact with people with disabilities) Physical inaccessibility Narrow definitions of normality

It is useful to explore your own understanding or thoughts about the life experiences and aspirations of people with disabilities to check whether you are in fact reinforcing some of these stereotypes by accepting them as true. Famous People with Disabilities People are often surprised to find that someone they thought they knew well has a disability that they were unaware of. Many disabilities are not obvious to others and cause problems or difficulties in only one or two aspects of peoples lives. Other disabilities are more obvious and more difficult for individuals to overcome by personal and environmental factors. Famous people with disabilities are important role models in society. They can be used as examples of triumph over adversity, and help to break down society stereotypes. Christopher Reeve example? Disability Language The language used when talking with and about people with disabilities is very important. Insensitive language can easily turn respondents off and negatively affect survey response rates. It can also alienate an important but disadvantaged group in society. Table 7.2 below provides a list of words or phrases which should be avoided because of the lack of sensitivity with people with disabilities. The language of the ICF is designed to be neutral. The forerunner to the ICF, the ICIDH, contained negative language such as handicap. The ICF has removed such language recognising that disability is a continuum of functioning.. Table 7.2 Negative terms relating to disability Term Disabled Person Reason to avoid term This description puts the disability before the person and their abilities. A more acceptable alternative is "person with a disability". Able-bodied, normal" People who do not have a disability can be termed nonor "ordinary" people disabled. Many people with disabilities are able-bodied. Handicapped This term has a submissive "cap in hand" connotation which is offensive. Handicap more accurately describes the effects of having a disability in a world which does not cater for people
10

The Disabled

Your "Problem"

Afflicted/Suffering

A Cripple, Mongol, Dwarf, Spastic, Epileptic or Deaf Mute

Deaf and Dumb Blind Deaf

Confined to a Wheelchair

with disabilities. People object to being put into a broad category such as this which concentrates on their abilities and ignores their individuality. It is more acceptable to describe people specifically, such as, "he has a physical disability" or "she has an intellectual disability". Avoid the description of a person's disability as a problem. It's a disability. Don't make assumptions about the impact it has. Say a person "has" a disability rather than saying they are "afflicted or suffering from" a particular disability. These words reinforce the stereotype of a person with a disability as a victim. These words define a person entirely on the basis of their disability and are seen as labeling people. Many of them have negative connotations. Instead, say: "person with a physical disability", "person with Down Syndrome", person with cerebral palsy", "person with epilepsy" and "hearing impaired" or "deaf person". Another problem with the use of these terms is that they are often used inappropriately as negative generalizations rather than to describe specific impairments. Inability to hear and speak doesn't mean a person is stupid, as "dumb" suggests. This is offensive. Only people with no vision are blind. The vast majority of people we label blind are actually "visually impaired" People who are severely or profoundly deaf are usually termed deaf. People with mild or moderate hearing loss are called "hearing impaired". Say "use a wheelchair". Confined has a negative connotation that is not necessary.

Cross cultural issues Cultural issues and how people from different cultures perceive and report disability, is one of the most difficult issues facing statisticians wanting to make comparisons of disability data across groups, countries and regions. The Washington Group have an objective to develop a measure of disability, suitable to collect in census format, that will provide a comparable measure of disability across the world. This is a very hard objective to achieve, and one some people consider impossible but worth striving to come as close as possible to. Some of the issues relating to culture and disability are:

11

Not all cultures view disability in the same way, for example, in New Zealand, Maori view disability different from the non-Maori. (elaborate how?) Whether someone reports having a difficulty with particular activities or participation depends upon their expectations of their ability to perform the activity. Some cultures are less willing than others to report family members with a disability. In some cultures, disability is seen as a punishment for past sins of the family. In others, there is a culture of shame associated with having a family member with a disability. The readiness of families to identify members as having a disability varies between cultures, and could significantly affect disability prevalence rates even with identical survey instruments and procedures. Some cultures do not have one overall word for disability. For example, the Pacific Islands people do not have one word for disability. Different disabilities are translated separately. Similarly in the Netherlands, there is no umbrella term for disability, just individual types of disability, such as blind, deaf etc. There are also cultural issues associated with providing information to government, with some cultures more willing to accept the potential benefit from cooperating with interviewers and providing quality information, compared to other countries or cultures.

There are some methods that work to minimise the effect of cultural differences. Provide information to respondents about the survey and the potential benefits that high quality data about persons with disabilities will bring to that population group. This might encourage some households reluctant to identify family members with a disability to answer openly and honestly to the survey questions. Ensure that the language used in the survey is acceptable to people with disabilities so they are not offended by the content of the survey. Train interviewers well so they know the content of the survey. Provide information to interviewers about people with disabilities and how they should interact with them. Some of these tips about interviewing people with disabilities are covered in the interviewing techniques discussion below.

General Interviewing Techniques Interviewing people with disabilities requires many of the same techniques as interviewing in any other statistical survey, such as a Household Labour Force Survey, a Health Surveyor a General Social Survey. However, there are also some techniques that relate more specifically to interviewing people with disabilities. Always begin by introducing yourself by name as a representative of your organisation and by presenting your identification card which you should wear at all time during the interview. You should then introduce the survey, explain why it is

12

being carried out and how the information will be used. Be prepared for questions such as: Where did you get my name? Why was I chosen for this interview? What kinds of questions are you going to ask? I'm old. I'm not disabled. Why are you including me in your survey? Why does the government spend money on a survey instead of providing better services to those who need them? I am a member of (name of disability organisation). Are they supporting this survey? What services are offered in my area? I am a person with a disability.

General Points to Consider Once the introduction has been successfully handled, you are ready to begin the interview. Your goal is to collect accurate information by using the questionnaire according to proven interview techniques. The questionnaire is the basic tool used to collect survey data. The wording of the questions and the logical order are important factors in the design of the questionnaire. Because researchers need to combine information the data collected from all interviews, they must be collected in a uniform manner. The following are some general points to remember: Survey Questions Ask all questions exactly as worded on the questionnaire. Research has shown that even slight word changes can alter the response obtained. If questions are rephrased the responses cannot be accurately combined with accurately asked questions. Survey Path Questions must be asked in the order they appear on the questionnaire. The sequence is planned for continuity and so the early questions will not affect the answers given to later questions. Asking all Questions Every question in the questionnaire must be asked. Sometimes the respondent while answering one question will also answer another appearing later. However, it is important that every question should be asked. To ease this situation you might say 'you've already told me something about this, but this next section asks...'. In so doing, you are indicating awareness of the earlier response, and are asking for the respondent's co- operation in answering again.

13

Let the respondent finish and let them respond in their own way Wait for the respondent to finish talking before you start writing. Failure to listen carefully can result in upsetting the respondent and making errors. Be patient Do not interrupt the respondent before he/she has finished, even if he/she hesitates. This hesitation may simply mean that the respondent is trying to recollect some fact(s). Sometimes people will initially answer "I don't really know" when, in fact, they are really considering the answer. Dont anticipate answers and dont make assumptions Do not anticipate answers by recording information given in the first part of a sentence. Wait until the respondent has finished his/her sentence. Unclear questions You might at times feel that the respondent's answer to a question is dubious. If you think the respondent does not understand the question, repeat the question as it is written. If there is still no understanding you will have to probe. Be careful not to antagonise the respondent by questioning his or her judgement. They are usually right. Uncomfortable questions Ask all questions positively. Some interviewers may feel uncomfortable when asking certain types of questions and adopt an apologetic attitude reflected by the use of statements such as: You might not want to answer this question, but or This question probably won't make much sense to you Such statements negatively affect the flow of the interview and have a tendency to change the respondents answers. Maintain a professional attitude It is important to maintain a professional attitude and a positive frame at all times. There may be occasions when respondents will give you a difficult time. Do not let a respondent upset or excite you and, by all means, be sure that you do not say anything to upset the respondent. Be courteous Common everyday courtesy is important during an interview. Being courteous towards a respondent will encourage him/her to react positively towards you. Thank the respondent At the end of each interview, thank the respondent for her/his time and cooperation.

14

The ideal situation is when you are able to complete an interview on your first visit or call. However, you may need to make a second or even third visit to obtain all or part of the information for an individual. This is particularly true for people with disabilities, some of whom may find completing the full interview at one time too tiring. Probing Respondents answers must satisfy the questions' objectives. However, even the best questionnaire and a willing respondent may occasionally elicit inadequate responses. At times, respondents may not know the answer to the question. They may misunderstand or misinterpret the question and as a result the answer may be incomplete, unclear, or inconsistent with other information. When this happens, interviewers must probe. Probing is an art. It must be accomplished in such a way that respondents do not feel their judgement is being questioned. They must not get the impression that the interview is a quiz or a cross-examination. Respondents also tend to answer in ways that they feel will be socially acceptable to the interviewer. If interviewers allow their own attitudes and values to enter the interview, the respondent's answers could well reflect these rather than their own, thus introducing a bias into the survey results. Respondents must not feel some answers are more 'acceptable' than others. In general, let nothing in your words and manner imply criticism, surprise, approval or disapproval, agreement or disagreement with an answer. a. Make brief assenting comments Comments such as 'yes' I see, show the respondent that you are giving attention to the answer, and often stimulate the respondent to talk further. The pause The pause informs a respondent that he/she has not answered the question satisfactorily and that you are waiting for an appropriate answer. Repeating the question Repeating the question is useful when the respondent does not understand the question, misinterprets it, seems unable to make up his/her mind, or strays from the subject. Repeat the respondent's reply This will help to clarify the response and prompt the respondent to enlarge upon his/her statement. Be sure you adhere strictly to the respondent's answer and do not interject your own ideas.

b.

c.

d.

15

e.

Ask neutral questions When repeating the question does not produce an adequate response, probe further by asking neutral questions. Probes in a neutral tone of voice are often used to obtain clearer responses. Questions must be asked with care so as not to bias the answer; probing questions must never suggest answers. Examples of neutral questions are: I don't understand what you mean. 'Which figure would you say comes closest Anything else Such questions indicate your interest in obtaining the most complete answers possible. This technique is dependable and fruitful when used correctly. It is sometimes a good technique to appear a little bewildered by the respondent's answer. Imply on your probe that it might be you failed to understand. For example, you could say I'm not sure what you mean by that could you tell me little bit more?' This technique arouses the respondent's desire to co-operate with someone who is conscientiously trying to do a good job. But do not overplay this technique. The respondent should not get the feeling that you don't know when a question is being properly answered.

f.

Asking for more information Respondents may not always know how much or what kind of information is required. They need you to let them know how detailed their answers should be: Sometimes you can just ask for more information, such as 'can you tell me a little more about that?' Zeroing in Respondents may feel uneasy at times when they cannot give you the most precise or exact information. In most cases, we would want their opinion or best recollection rather than losing the information completely.

g.

Keys to Good Listening A good interviewer does more than ask questions. To interview properly, you must be a good listener. Good listening skills must also be developed. a. Wait for the respondent to stop speaking before you start writing. Failure to listen carefully can result in upsetting the respondent and making errors. A short pause after each question has the effect of ensuring that the respondent has finished speaking. Pauses in the interview also communicate a mood. A lack of pauses indicates the interviewer is anxious and insecure which tends to make the respondent feel the same.

16

b.

Ask questions if you don't understand something or feel that you have missed a point. Neglecting to do so could cause confusion later in the interview and lead the respondent to feel that you are not really listening. Don't interrupt A pause, even a long pause, does not always mean that the respondent is finished everything that he/she wants to say. Some respondents will at first answer "I don't know", when in fact they are actually considering the question. Concentrate Focus your mind on what the respondent is saying. Practice shutting out distractions. Interject An occasional "yes, I see" shows the respondent you are still with him/her but don't overdo it or use comments that might bias the interview in any way. Avoid reactions As already mentioned, do not allow the respondent to irritate you by the things he/she might say, or allow his/her manner to distract you. Never, by word or tone, indicate surprise, pleasure or disapproval over an answer. Maintain a common committal attitude. Don't jump to conclusions Avoid making assumptions about what the respondent is going to say, mentally or orally trying to complete his or her sentence for him/her. Such conclusions might "lead" the respondent and bias the interview. Past experience is that respondents tend to make their answers agree with what they think you expect them to say, even though facts may be different. To ensure this is avoided, always ask all questions, just as they appear in the survey.

c.

d.

e.

f.

g.

Interviewing People With Disabilities -Tips and Traps Even well trained household survey interviewers would benefit from training specific to interviewing people with disabilities. Some tips and traps for such interviews listed below. Treat people with disabilities as you would treat anyone else. They do the same things as you do, but sometimes use different techniques. It is a mistake to make assumptions concerning an individual's abilities or capacities based on the appearance of his or her disability. For instance, many wheelchair users can walk with an aid but they use wheelchairs to save energy and move more quickly. Each disability has a wide range of severity and individuals with the same type of disability are never exactly alike in terms of what they can do. Establishing trust is vital for quality responses.

17

Be sensitive to the language you use. Do not patronise people with disabilities. Do not tell someone with a disability that you admire his or her courage and strength. Many people with disabilities can compensate for their disability through acquired techniques. For example, persons who are deaf may have been taught to speak and lip read. As such, a person who is deaf may be capable of conversing orally. Speak directly to the person with a disability even if they are accompanied by an attendant or sign language interpreter. Talking to their companion promotes the image of people with disabilities being sick and incompetent, and is not conducive to a successful interview. People with disabilities usually refer to daily activities in the same way as people without disabilities. Do not hesitate to use the words "look" and "see" with people who are blind or visually impaired, or the words "listen" and "hear" with people who are deaf or hard of hearing, or the words "walk" and "run" with people with mobility impairments. People with disabilities are not ill or sick. Equating disability with being ill or sick treats the person as not being responsible for himself/herself and in need of constant care. Never speak to a person with a disability in a different tone of voice -meaning one that assumes difference based on ability. This creates negative feelings on the part of the person with a disability, and will likely ruin the interview. Use a normal tone of voice when speaking with a person with a disability. Maintain eye contact with the person you are interviewing. Avoiding eye contact will only increase the tension in the interview. Communicating with a person who has a disability may seem difficult at first. For example, a person with a speech impairment has distinct speech patterns. What may appear to be uncontrolled speech at first can be understood after a few moments of listening. Keep a word out for key words or phrases and ask the person to repeat themselves if you do not understand what they are saying. Speech may be hard to understand but it does not necessarily mean a person has an intellectual disability. People who have unclear speech, such as some oral deaf people and people with cerebral palsy, are used to people asking them to repeat things, so be honest about clarifying a response. You may like to repeat back to them what you think they have said for a yes/no response. Do not assume the use of technical aids, such as a wheelchair is tragedy; means of freedom and allows the user to move about independently. A wheelchair is an extension of personal space. Do not lean on it or push it without checking with the user. If communicating with a deaf person through a sign language interpreter, speak to the deaf person directly and speak at a normal pace. Face a person who is lip-reading. Avoid chewing gum or putting your hands in front of your face. Speak slowly and clearly. Do not exaggerate or

18

overemphasis words. This distorts lip movements making lip-reading more difficult. When interviewing a person who is deaf it is important to have his/her attention before speaking. A person who is deaf may need a tap on the shoulder, a wave of the hand or other visual signs to gain attention. When talking with a person who is hearing impaired speak clearly, not loudly, face them and ensure your face is well lit and not obscured by your hand or overgrown facial hair. Do not shout at a person. The person will ask you to speak louder or slower if this is what is needed. Try to rephrase a question if the person lip-reading does not understand after repeating two or three times. Sometimes a group of lip movements is difficult to lip-read. Body language and facial expression are important factors in communication. It is a mistake to understand that people who are deaf are also non-verbal. People who are deaf have normal vocal organs. Some choose not to use their voice if they think they are difficult to understand or have inappropriate pitch or volume. Not all people who have difficulty hearing can lip-read. This is a common misconception. Announce your arrival and exit to a person who is blind or visually impaired. Identify yourself and let him/her know you are addressing him/her by using his/her name or touching his/her arm. Never distract a guide dog with a person who is blind. The dog is working and is responsible for this person's safety. Interference could lead to unnecessary tragedy. Not all people who are legally blind can read Braille. People with mental disabilities may take time to understand what is being asked. There might be cases where a question will have to be explained i.e. reworded by the interviewer. Do not rush. Make sure the person clearly understands what is being asked. People with mental disabilities are not childlike. People with mental disabilities are people who can lead their own lives their own way. Be patient with people with intellectual disabilities. You may need to rephrase to assist their understanding. They may be anxious to please and say what they think you want to hear. Watch for outside influences. Fatigue may be a problem for some people. For example a respondent with a head injury or neurological condition may become fatigued and appear to be angry or frustrated. This is because they may have difficulty concentrating. Suggest a break. A person may have more than one disability. People with a range of disabilities may prefer to have a support person they feel comfortable with at the interview. Caregivers may be more objective than parents for a proxy interview.

Interviewing in Institutions

19

Interviewing in institutions demands that interviewers be sensitive to the situation and to the special needs of the staff members and the respondents. Institution staff members (administrators or other contacts, such as head nurses and ward clerks) are busy professionals. Scheduling appointments for proxy interviews at a mutually convenient time will require flexibility on your part and organisation. Interviewers must be prepared for the fact that appointments may change with little notice. Interviewing respondents will also require a high degree of professionalism. You must be prepared for any situation and be able to adapt your interviewing skills to the situation quickly and tactfully. If at any time during the interview you sense that the respondent is becoming upset, or incapable of completing the interview, terminate the interview and discuss the situation with the administrator or the contact in the organisation.

20