TY - JOUR
T1 - Matching survey responses to official records
T2 - An exploration of validity in victimization reporting
AU - Miller, Peter V.
AU - Groves, Robert M.
N1 - Funding Information:
Peter V. Miller is Associate Professor of Communication Studies and Research Faculty. Center for Urban Affairs and Policy Research. Northwestern University. Robert M. Groves is Associate Research Scientist, Survey Research Center. Institute for Social Research. University of Michigan. Research for this article was partially supprted by a contract from the Bureau of Justice Statistics, U.S. Department of Justice. The article does not necessarily represent the views of the Department of Justice. The authors are indebted to Allen H. Andrews. Superintendent of Police. Peoria. Illinois, for making the study possible and to Dr. Charles Cannell. Dr. Charles Cowan, and Dr. Wesley Skogan for insightful comments on an earlier draft. The authors are responsible for any errors which remain.
PY - 1985/9
Y1 - 1985/9
N2 - Record check studies-involving the comparison of survey responses with external record evidence-are a familiar tool in survey methodology. The findings of a recently conducted reverse record check study are reported here. The analyses examine match rates between survey reports and police records, employing more or less restrictive match criteria-e.g., using various computer algorithms versus human judgments. The analyses reveal marked differences in the level of survey-record correspondence. Since the level of match rate appears highly variable depending on the definition of a "match," we advocate reexamination of the "lessons" of previous record check studies which employed only vaguely specified match criteria. We argue, further, that record evidence may best be employed in constructing alternative indicators of phenomena to be measured, rather than as the arbiter of survey response quality.
AB - Record check studies-involving the comparison of survey responses with external record evidence-are a familiar tool in survey methodology. The findings of a recently conducted reverse record check study are reported here. The analyses examine match rates between survey reports and police records, employing more or less restrictive match criteria-e.g., using various computer algorithms versus human judgments. The analyses reveal marked differences in the level of survey-record correspondence. Since the level of match rate appears highly variable depending on the definition of a "match," we advocate reexamination of the "lessons" of previous record check studies which employed only vaguely specified match criteria. We argue, further, that record evidence may best be employed in constructing alternative indicators of phenomena to be measured, rather than as the arbiter of survey response quality.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=0039231972&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=0039231972&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1086/268934
DO - 10.1086/268934
M3 - Article
AN - SCOPUS:0039231972
VL - 49
SP - 366
EP - 380
JO - Public Opinion Quarterly
JF - Public Opinion Quarterly
SN - 0033-362X
IS - 3
ER -