Volume 43 - Article 50 | Pages 1461–1494  

Evaluating interviewer manipulation in the new round of the Generations and Gender Survey

By Eugenio Paglino, Tom Emery


Background: Past research has criticized the quality of the Generations and Gender Survey retrospective fertility and partnership histories. For example, fatigue and learning effects were deemed responsible for distortions in the Generations and Gender Survey in Germany.

Objective: We assess the quality of the Generations and Gender Survey for Belarus (GGS-BL) in 2017 to assess whether the new centralized fieldwork system and monitoring procedures are effective in preventing distortions in life history data.

Methods: We conduct a range of analyses to find evidence of fatigue and learning effects on the part of both interviewers and respondents. Multilevel models, comparison of crucial indicators with other sources, and descriptive analysis of item-nonresponse are used.

Results: In a preliminary analysis, we find no evidence of severe distortions. An in-depth analysis into interviewer and respondent effects reveals some small signs of possible manipulation. However, when assessing the impact of anomalous interviewers on the indicators more likely to be affected, we find no evidence of harm to data quality.

Conclusions: The new data collection procedure adopted by the Generations and Gender Survey seems to be effective in preventing detectable manipulation and fabrication. Furthermore, we dismiss the hypothesis that fatigue and learning effects are a source of bias in the collection of life history data.

Contribution: This paper delivers three key messages: (1) the Generations and Gender Survey for Belarus is a reliable source for retrospective histories, (2) in-field checks are an effective tool to prevent fabrication, and (3) extensive use of inexperienced interviewers does not seem to harm data quality when adequate monitoring and monitoring is in place.

Author's Affiliation

Other articles by the same author/authors in Demographic Research

Immigrant mortality advantage in the United States during the first year of the COVID-19 pandemic
Volume 50 - Article 7

Generations and Gender Programme Wave 1 data collection: An overview and assessment of sampling and fieldwork methods, weighting procedures, and cross-sectional representativeness
Volume 34 - Article 18

Measuring intergenerational financial support: Analysis of two cross-national surveys
Volume 33 - Article 33

Intergenerational transfers and European families: Does the number of siblings matter?
Volume 29 - Article 10

Most recent similar articles in Demographic Research

Gone and forgotten? Predictors of birth history omissions in India
Volume 50 - Article 32    | Keywords: fertility history, interviewer effects, interviewer observations, measurement error, missing data, panel data, survey methodology

Calculating contraceptive prevalence and unmet need for family planning in low-fertility countries with the Generations and Gender Survey
Volume 49 - Article 21    | Keywords: cross-national study, Demographic and Health Surveys (DHS), Europe, family planning, Fertility and Family Survey (FFS), Generations and Gender Survey (GGS), longitudinal data, panel data, unplanned births, World Fertility Survey

The quality of fertility data in the web-based Generations and Gender Survey
Volume 49 - Article 3    | Keywords: accuracy, data quality, fertility, Generations and Gender Survey (GGS)

Investigating the application of generalized additive models to discrete-time event history analysis for birth events
Volume 47 - Article 22    | Keywords: discrete-time event history, educational differentials, fertility, general additive models, parity progression, period fertility, postponement of childbearing, retrospective histories, time since last birth, United Kingdom

Mexican mortality 1990‒2016: Comparison of unadjusted and adjusted estimates
Volume 44 - Article 30    | Keywords: data quality, demography, Human Mortality Database (HMD), life expectancy, life tables, Mexico, mortality