Experiments On Multiple Requests For Consent to Data Linkage in Surveys

Author:

Walzenbach Sandra,Burton Jonathan,Couper Mick P,Crossley Thomas F,JÄckle Annette

Abstract

Abstract It is increasingly common for researchers to link survey data to administrative data. If several administrative data sources are of interest, respondents are required to give consent to each of them, meaning that multiple consent questions have to be included in one survey. Existing literature suggests that individual consent varies widely between data sources and over time, but little is known about how respondents process multiple consent requests in a single survey. Using an online access panel in Great Britain, we conducted a set of experiments in two surveys to explore multiple consent requests (covering five domains or data sources). In the first study, we experimentally varied the format of the request, testing three versions: (1) a sequence of pages (with one response per domain), (2) all five requests on the same page (with one response per domain), and (3) a single request (with one joint request covering all five domains). We also varied the order of the domains. We find that average consent rates do not differ by format, but asking a less-sensitive or easier-to-comply request first yields slightly higher average consent rates than asking a more sensitive request first. We repeated the order experiment in a second study, using an independent sample from the same panel, and adding two more order conditions. We find average consent rates are not affected much by order, but the consent to individual domains is affected by order. However, we fail to replicate the pattern of consents found in the first study. We conclude that the order in which multiple consent requests are asked does matter, but in complicated ways that depend on the particular outcomes in which one is interested. Objective knowledge and subjective comprehension of the consent process, and confidence in the decision are largely unaffected by format or order.

Publisher

Oxford University Press (OUP)

Subject

Applied Mathematics,Statistics, Probability and Uncertainty,Social Sciences (miscellaneous),Statistics and Probability

Reference51 articles.

1. The Impact of Relative Standards on the Propensity to Disclose;Acquisti;Journal of Marketing Research,2012

2. More on Self-Perception Theory’s Foot Technique in the Pre-Call/Mail Survey Setting;Allen;Journal of Marketing Research,1980

3. Research Synthesis: AAPOR Report on Online Panels;Baker;Public Opinion Quarterly,2010

4. Fifteen Years of Foot-in-the-Door Research: A Meta-Analysis;Beaman;Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin,1983

Cited by 6 articles. 订阅此论文施引文献 订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3