Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2011;23(4):439-460.
doi: 10.1177/1525822X11418176. Epub 2011 Aug 25.

Using Cognitive Interviewing and Behavioral Coding to Determine Measurement Equivalence across Linguistic and Cultural Groups: An Example from the International Tobacco Control Policy Evaluation Project

James Thrasher  1   2 , Anne C K Quah  3 , Gregory Dominick  1 , Ron Borland  4 , Pete Driezen  5 , Rahmat Awang  6 , Maizurah Omar  6 , Warwick Hosking  7 , Buppha Sirirassamee  8 , Marcelo Boado  9 , Kristen Miller  10
Affiliations

Using Cognitive Interviewing and Behavioral Coding to Determine Measurement Equivalence across Linguistic and Cultural Groups: An Example from the International Tobacco Control Policy Evaluation Project

James Thrasher et al. Field methods. 2011.

Abstract

The present study aimed to examine and compare results from two questionnaire pretesting methods (i.e., behavioral coding and cognitive interviewing) in order to assess systematic measurement bias in survey questions for adult smokers across six countries (USA, Australia, Uruguay, Mexico, Malaysia and Thailand). Protocol development and translation involved multiple bilingual partners in each linguistic/cultural group. The study was conducted with convenience samples of 20 adult smokers in each country. Behavioral coding and cognitive interviewing methods produced similar conclusions regarding measurement bias for some questions; however, cognitive interviewing was more likely to identify potential response errors than behavioral coding. Coordinated survey qualitative pretesting (or post-survey evaluation) is feasible across cultural groups, and can provide important information on comprehension and comparability. Cognitive interviewing appears a more robust technique than behavioral coding, although combinations of the two might be even better.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Figure 1.
Figure 1.
Protocol development steps
See this image and copyright information in PMC

Similar articles

See all similar articles

Cited by

See all "Cited by" articles

References

    1. Blair J, Ackerman A, Piccinino L, & Levenstein R (2007). Using behavior coding to validate cognitive interview findings.Paper presented at the Proceedings of the American Statistical Association: Section on Survey Research Methods.
    1. Bollen KA, Entwisle B, & Alderson AS (1993). Macrocomparative research methods. Annual Review of Sociology, 19, 321–351.
    1. Burlew AK, Feaster D, Brecht M-L, & Hubbard R (2009). Measurement and data analysis in research addressing health disparities in substance abuse. Journal of Substance Abuse Treatment, 36, 25–43. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Cannell CF, L. S, Hausser DL. (1975). A Technique for Evaluating Interviewer Performance. Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan.
    1. Coronado I, & Earle D (2002). Effectiveness of the American Community Survey of the U.S. Census in a borderlands colonia setting. Washington, DC: US Census Bureau.

LinkOut - more resources