Abstract
There has been relatively little change over recent decades in the methods used in research on self-reported delinquency. Face-to-face interviews and self-administered interviews in the classroom are still the predominant alternatives envisaged. New methods have been brought into the picture by recent computer technology, the Internet, and an increasing availability of computer equipment and Internet access in schools. In the autumn of 2004, a controlled experiment was conducted with 1,203 students in Lausanne (Switzerland), where “paper-and-pencil” questionnaires were compared with computer-assisted interviews through the Internet. The experiment included a test of two different definitions of the (same) reference period. After the introductory question (“Did you ever...”), students were asked how many times they had done it (or experienced it), if ever, “over the last 12 months” or “since the October 2003 vacation”. Few significant differences were found between the results obtained by the two methods and for the two definitions of the reference period, in the answers concerning victimisation, self-reported delinquency, drug use, failure to respond (missing data). Students were found to be more motivated to respond through the Internet, take less time for filling out the questionnaire, and were apparently more confident of privacy, while the school principals were less reluctant to allow classes to be interviewed through the Internet. The Internet method also involves considerable cost reductions, which is a critical advantage if self-reported delinquency surveys are to become a routinely applied method of evaluation, particularly so in countries with limited resources. On balance, the Internet may be instrumental in making research on self-reported delinquency far more feasible in situations where limited resources so far have prevented its implementation.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
Notes
In the present test the first author was present at all sessions in Cossonay. During the second test, supervision was less systematic, because the presence of computer teachers turned out to be more decisive. Once duly instructed, they could easily replace researchers as supervisors.
This test was limited to the paper–pencil questionnaire, the reason being that this questionnaire could be far more easily presented in two versions.
We thank an anonymous reviewer for the suggestion to look specifically at missing values.
In order not to overcharge the paper, we have not reproduced here the tables with detailed missing values. These results can be obtained on request from the first author.
The results are almost identical for last-year prevalence rates.
The Swiss school system offers three different levels of education for the ages at stake, namely (1) the “voie baccalauréat” or high school diploma, which, at age 18 years will qualify students to attend a university or any other form of higher education, (2) a medium track, which prepares students for more qualified apprenticeships (such as banking and clerical careers), and (3) a lower track, which usually leads to apprenticeships in manual jobs.
Preparing two different questionnaires would have unduly complicated this (first) experimental test of Internet vs paper-and-pencil questionnaires.
This fact increased, obviously, reluctance among principals who, not without justification, feared criticism in case of “negative” results for their schools, a risk they would not face if only one class per school was being interviewed. On the same line, having one or two classes interviewed is a minor disturbance of school routine, compared with a survey covering the entire student population.
ISRD-2 is a follow up of ISRD-1, which was launched by the Research and Documentation Centre of the Dutch Ministry of Justice in 1992. All countries collected the data during 2006, and a joint publication of national chapters will be published in a book at the end of 2007.
References
Becker, R., & Günther, R. (2004). Selektives Antwortverhalten bei Fragen zum delinquenten Handeln. ZUMA-Nachrichten, 54, 39–59 (28.05.2004).
Beebe, T. J., Harrison, P. A., McRae, J. R. J., Anderson, R. E., & Fulkerson, J. A. (1998). An evaluation of computer-assisted self-interviews in a school setting Public Opinion Quarterly, 62, 623–632.
Choi, S. W., & Tinkler, T. (April 2002). Evaluating comparability of paper-and-pencil and computer based assessment in a K-12 setting. Paper presented at the annual meting of the National Council on Measurement in Education New Orleans, LA.
Couper, M. P., Traugott, M. W., & Lamias, M. J. (2001). Web survey design and administration. Public Opinion Quarterly, 65, 230–253.
Dillman, D. A., Redline, C. D., & Carley-Baxter, L. R. (1999). Influence of Type of Question on Skip Pattern Compliance in Self-Administered Questionnaires. Paper presented at the Joint Statistical Meetings of the American Statistical Association, Indianapolis.
Gfroerer, J. (1996). Special populations, sensitive issues, and the use of computer-assisted interviewing in surveys. In R. B. Warneke (Ed.), Health Survey Research Methods Conference Proceedings (pp. 177–180). DHHS Publication No. (PHS) 96–1013. Hyattsville, Md.: National Center for Health Statistics.
Eisner, M., Manzoni, P., & Ribeaud, D. (2000). Opfererfahrungen und selbst berichtete Gewalt bei Schülerinnen und Schülern im Kanton Zürich. Aarau: Sauerländer.
Fendrich, M., Johnson, T. P., Wislar, J. S., Hubbell, A., & Spiehler, V. (2004). The utility of drug testing in epidemiological research: results from a general population survey. Addiction, 99, 197–208.
Haines, K., Case, S., Isled, E., & Hancock, A. (2004). Extending entitlement: Making it real. Cardiff: Welsh Assembly Government.
Hetter, R., Segall, D. O., & Bloxom, B. M. (1997). Evaluating item calibration medium in computerized adaptive testing. In W. A. Sands, B. K. Waters, & J. R. McBride (Eds.), Computerized adaptive testing: from inquiry to operation. Washington D.C.: American Psychological Association.
Jenkins, C. R., & Dillman, D. A. (1997). Chapter 7: Towards a theory of self-administered questionnaire design. In L. Lyberg, P. Biemer, M. Collins, E. DeLeeuw, C. Dippo, N. Schwarz & D. Trewin (Eds.), Survey measurement and process quality (pp. 165–196). New York: Wiley-Interscience.
Johnston, L. D., & O’Malley, P. M. (1985). Issues of Validity and Population Coverage in Student Surveys of Drug Use. In B. A. Rouse, N. J. Kozel & L. G. Richards (Eds.), Self-report methods of estimating drug use: meeting current challenges to validity. NIDA Research Monograph 57, 31-54. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.
Jones, E. F., & Forrest, J. D. (1992). Underreporting of abortion in survey of U.S. women: 1976 to 1988. Demography, 29, 113.
Junger-Tas, J., Terlouw G. J, & Klein, M. W. (1994). Delinquency behavior among young people in the Western World. Amsterdam and New York: Kugler.
Killias, M. (1990). New methodological perspectives for victimisation surveys: The potential of computer-assisted telephone surveys and some related innovations. International Review of Victimology, 1(2), 153–167.
Killias, M. (2002). Grundriss der Kriminologie. Berne: Stämpfli.
Killias, M., Villettaz, P., & Rabasa, J. (1994). Self-reported Juvenile Delinquency in Switzerland. In J. Junger-Tas, G. J. Terlouw, M. Klein (Eds.), Delinquent behavior among young people in the Western World (pp. 186–211). Amsterdam: Kugler.
Kissling, I. (2004). Comparaison des modalités de passation: Internet contre papier-crayon. Lausanne: ICDP-ESC, University of Lausanne.
Klein, M. W. (Ed.) (1989). Cross-national research in self-reported crime and delinquency. Dordrecht/Boston/London: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
Kury, H. (1994). Zum Einfluss der Art der Datenerhebung auf die Ergebnisse von Umfragen. Monatsschrift für Kriminologie und Strafrechtsreform, 77(1), 132–144.
Mead, A. D., & Drasgow, F. (1993). Effects of administration medium: A meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 114(3), 449–458.
Needle, R., McCubbin, H, Lorence, J., & Hochhauser, M. (1983). Reliability and validity of adolescent self-reported drug use in a family-based study: A methodological report. International Journal of the Addictions, 18, 901–912.
Oberwittler, D., & Naplava, T. (2002). Auswirkungen des Erhebungsverfahrens bei Jugendbefragungen zu ,heiklen’ Themen - schulbasierte schriftliche Befragung und haushaltsbasierte mündliche Befragung im Vergleich. ZUMA-Nachrichten, 51, 49–77.
O’Malley, P. M., Bachman, J. G., & Johnston, L. D. (1983). Reliability and consistency in self-reports of drug use. International Journal of the Addictions, 18, 805–824.
Redline, C. D., & Dillman, D. A. (1999). The Influence of Auxiliary, Symbolic, Numeric, and Verbal Languages on Navigational Compliance in Self-Administered Questionnaires. Paper presented at the International Conference on Survey Nonresponse, Portland, OR.
Sanchez, M. E. (1992). Effects of questionnaire design on the quality of survey data. The Public Opinion Quarterly, 56(2), 206–217.
Scherpenzeel, A. (1992). Response effecten in slachtoffer-enquêtes: Effecten van vraagformulering en dataverzamelingsmethode. Tijdschrift voor criminology, 34(4), 296–305.
Scherpenzeel, A. (2001). Mode effects in panel surveys. A comparison of CAPI and CATI. Neuchâtel (Switzerland): Swiss Federal Office of Statistics (document 448–0100).
Schwind H.-D., Fetchenhauer, D., Ahlborn, W., & Weiss, R. (2001). Kriminalitätsphänomene im Langzeitvergleich am Beispiel einer deutschen Grossstadt (Bochum 1975 – 1986 – 1998). Neuwied (Germany): Luchterhand.
Tourangeau, R, & Smith, T. W. (1996). Asking sensitive questions: The impact of data collection mode, question format, and question context. Public Opinion Quarterly, 60, 275–304.
Turner, C. F., Danella, R. D., & Rogers, S. M. (1995). Sexual behavior in the United States 1930–1990: trends and methodological problems. Sexually Transmitted Diseases, 22, 173–190.
Turner, C. F, Ku, L., Rogers, S. M., Lindberg, L. D, Peck, J. H., & Sonenstein, F. L. (1998). Adolescent sexual behavior, drug use, and violence: increased reporting with computer survey technology. Science, 280, 867–873.
Turner, C. F., Ku, L, Sonenstein, F. L., & Pleck, J. H. (1996). Impact of ACASI on Reporting of Male-Male Sexual Contacts: Preliminary results from the 1995 National Survey of Adolescent Males. In R. B. Warneke (Ed), Health survey research methods conference proceedings (pp. 171–176). DHHS Publication No. (PHS) 96–1013. Hyattsville, Md.: National Center for Health Statistics.
Turner, C. F., Lessler, J. T., George, B. J., Hubbard, M. L., & Witt, M. B. (1992). Effects of mode of administration and wording on data quality. In C. T. Turner, J. T. Lessler & J. C. Gfroerer (Eds.), Survey measurement of drug use: Methodological studies (pp. 177–220). DHHS Publication No. (ADM) 92–1929. Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office.
van Dijk, J., Mayhew, P., & Killias, M. (1990). Experiences of crime across the World. Deventer/Boston: Kluwer.
Weerman, F. M., Smeenk, W., Slotboom, A., Harland, P., den Dijker, L., Bijleveld, C., et al. (2003). De survey van het nscr-schoolproject. Documentatie en tabellenboek van de eerste onderzoeksronde . Leiden: NSCR, intern rapport 2003–6.
Weisburd, D., Lum, C. M., & Yang, S.-M. (2003). When can we conclude that treatments or programs ‘don’t work’?. Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Sciences, 587, 31–48.
Wetzels, P., Enzmann, D., Mecklenburg, E., & Pfeiffer, C. (2000). Jugend und Gewalt. Eine repräsentative Dunkelfeldanalyse in München und acht anderen deutschen Städten. Baden-Baden: Nomos.
Wright, D. L., Aquilino, W. S., & Supple, A. J. (1998). A comparison of computer-assisted and paper-and-pencil self-administered questionnaires in a survey on smoking, alcohol, and drug use. Public Opinion Quarterly, 62(3), 331–353.
Zanes, A., & Matsoukas, E. (1979). Different settings, different results? A comparison of school and home responses. Public Opinion Quarterly, 43, 550–557.
Acknowledgements
This experiment has been possible thanks to the Directors of the secondary schools at Cossonay, Penthalaz and Lausanne, the researchers who created PHP Surveyor, Isabelle Moulet and Romain Voisard at the University of Lausanne for their assistance with templates, PHP coding and many other tasks, as well as our School’s MA students, who supervised classes during interviews, and students and computer teachers who gave their time. We thank also Dr. Oberwittler for helpful suggestions during the preparation of the experiment. Special thanks are due to four anonymous reviewers who offered most valuable suggestions on how to present the results and to Klaus Müller for his correction of the English language.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Lucia, S., Herrmann, L. & Killias, M. How important are interview methods and questionnaire designs in research on self-reported juvenile delinquency? An experimental comparison of Internet vs paper-and-pencil questionnaires and different definitions of the reference period. J Exp Criminol 3, 39–64 (2007). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11292-007-9025-1
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11292-007-9025-1