AIDS and Behavior

, Volume 11, Issue 2, pp 313–323 | Cite as

Interactive Voice Response Technology Applied to Sexual Behavior Self-reports: A Comparison of Three Methods

  • Kerstin E. E. Schroder
  • Christopher J. Johnson
  • John S. Wiebe


We tested the feasibility and performance of the Interactive Voice Response Technology (IVR) in the assessment of sexual behavior self-reports, relative to self-administered questionnaire (SAQ) and Timeline Followback (TLFB) methods. The sample consisted of 44 sexually active Hispanic students recruited at the University of Texas at El Paso who reported daily about sexual behaviors and substance use. Thirty-three participants (75%, 18 women, 15 men) were retained for at least 80 days of the 91-day IVR. At follow-up, sexual behaviors and substance use were assessed by questionnaire (summary) reports and by TLFB, referring to the same 3-month interval. ANOVAs with normalized variables indicated less reporting in the TLFB and over-reporting of substance use in the questionnaire relative to the daily IVR self-reports. Gender moderated the effects of assessment mode, which were observed among women only. HLM analyses indicated a significant decrease in self-reports over time, suggesting reactivity of self-monitoring via IVR on behavior.


Sexual risk behavior Substance use Gender TLFB IVR SAQ 



This work was supported by a grant from Utah State University to Kerstin E. E. Schroder. We thank the participants and the members of the project team for their contributions to this research.


  1. Armeli, S., Carney, M. A., O’Neil, T. P., Tennen, H., & Affleck, G. (2000). Stress and alcohol use: A daily process examination of the stressor-vulnerability model. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 78, 979–994.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Carey, M. P., Braaten, L. S., Maisto, S. A., Gleason, J. R., Forsyth, A. D., Durant, L. E. et al. (2000). Using information, motivational enhancement, and skills training to reduce the risk of HIV infection for low-income urban women: A second randomized clinical trial. Health Psychology, 19, 3–11.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Carey, M. P., Carey, K. B., Maisto, S. A., Gordon, C. M., & Weinhardt, L. S. (2001). Assessing sexual risk behavior with the Timeline Followback (TLFB) approach: Continued development and psychometric evaluation with psychiatric outpatients. International Journal of STD and AIDS, 12, 365–375.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Carey, M. P., Maisto, S. A., Kalichman, S. C., Forsyth, A. D., Wright, E. M., & Johnson, B. T. (1997). Enhancing motivation to reduce the risk of HIV infection for economically disadvantaged urban women. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 65, 531–541.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Catania, J. A., Gibson, D. R., Chitwood, D. D., & Coates, T. J. (1990). Methodological problems in AIDS behavioral research: influences on measurement error and participation bias in studies of sexual behavior. Psychological Bulletin, 108, 339–362.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. CDC (2002). HIV/AIDS among hispanics in the United States. Center for Disease Control and Prevention. Retrieved July 24, 2004, at: Scholar
  7. Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Earlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
  8. Durant, L. E., & Carey, M. P. (2000). Self-administered questionnaires versus face-to-face interviews in assessing sexual behavior in young women. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 29, 309–322.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Durant, L. E., Carey, M. P., & Schroder, K. E. E. (2002). Effects of anonymity, gender, and erotophilia on the quality of data obtained from self-reports of socially sensitive behaviors. Journal of Behavioral Medicine, 25, 439–467.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Fox, J. (1997). Applied regression analysis, linear models, and related methods. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  11. Gillmore, M. R., Gaylord, J., Hartway, J., Hoppe, M. J., Morrison, D. M., Leigh, B. C. et al. (2001). Daily data collection of sexual and other health-related behaviors. Journal of Sex Research, 38, 35–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Graham, C. A., Catania, J. A., Brand, R., Duong, T., & Canchola, J. A. (2003). Recalling sexual behavior: A methodological analysis of memory recall bias via interview using the diary as a gold standard. Journal of Sex Research, 40, 325–332.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. Kalichman, S. C., Rompa, D., & Coley, B. (1996). Experimental component analysis of a behavioral HIV-AIDS prevention intervention for inner-city women. Journal of Consulting & Clinical Psychology, 64, 687–693.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Keppel, G. (1991). Design and analysis: A researcher’s handbook (3rd ed.). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.Google Scholar
  15. Mundt, J. C., Perrine, M. W., Searles, J. S., & Walter, D. (1995). An application of the interactive voice response technology to longitudinal studies of daily behavior. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments and Computers, 27, 351–357.Google Scholar
  16. Norris, A. E., & Ford, K. (1998). Moderating influence of peer norms on gender differences in condom use. Applied Developmental Science, 2(4), 174–181.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Osborne, J. W. (2002). Notes on the use of data transformations. Practical Assessment, Research, & Evaluation, 8(6).Google Scholar
  18. Perrine, M. W., Mundt, J. C., Searles, J. S., & Lester, L. S. (1995). Validation of daily self-reported alcohol consumption using interactive voice response (IVR) technology. Journal of Studies on Alcohol, 56, 487–490.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. Perrine, M. W., & Schroder, K. E. E. (2005). How many drinks did you have on September 11, 2001? Journal of Studies on Alcohol, 66, 536–544.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. Raudenbush, S. W., & Bryk, A. S. (2002). Hierarchical linear models. Applications and data analysis methods (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks: Sage.Google Scholar
  21. Schroder, K. E. E., Carey, M. P., & Vanable, P. A. (2003). Methodological challenges in research on sexual risk behavior: II. Accuracy of self-reports. Annals of Behavioral Medicine, 26, 104–123.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Searles, J. S., Perrine, M. W., Mundt, J. C., & Helzer, J. E. (1995). Self-report of drinking using touch-tone telephone: Extending the limits of reliable daily contact. Journal of Studies on Alcohol, 56, 375–382.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. Sobell, L. C., & Sobell, M. B. (2000). Alcohol Timeline Followback (TLFB). In A. P. Association (Eds.) Handbook of psychiatric measures. Washington, DC: American Psychiatric Association.Google Scholar
  24. Tabachnik, B. G., & Fidell, L. S. (2001). Computer-assisted research design and analysis. Boston, MS: Allyn & Bacon.Google Scholar
  25. Weinhardt, L. S., Carey, M. P., Maisto, S. A., Carey, K. B., Cohen, M. M., & Wickramasinghe, S. M. (1998a). Reliability of the timeline follow-back sexual behavior interview. Annals of Behavioral Medicine, 20, 25–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Weinhardt, L. S., Forsyth, A. D., Carey, M. P., Jaworski, B. C., & Durant, L. E. (1998b). Reliability and validity of self-report measures of HIV-related sexual behavior: Progress since 1990 and recommendations for research and practice. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 27, 155–180.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, Inc. 2006

Authors and Affiliations

  • Kerstin E. E. Schroder
    • 1
  • Christopher J. Johnson
    • 2
  • John S. Wiebe
    • 2
  1. 1.Department of PsychologyUtah State UniversityLoganUSA
  2. 2.Department of PsychologyUniversity of Texas at El PasoEl PasoUSA

Personalised recommendations