TABLE 2.
Mean subjective ratings and objective indicators of performance by mode of administration.
| Audio CASI5 | Video CASI | Paper SAQ | P | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| SUBJECTIVE RATINGS (0–2 scale) | ||||
| Liked best | 1.53 | 1.23 | 0.24 | <.01 1 |
| Best for asking sensitive Qs. | 1.29 | 1.21 | 0.50 | <.01 1 |
| Easiest to change answer | 0.96 | 0.93 | 1.14 | .61 |
| Most interesting | 1.72 | 1.11 | 0.15 | .01 2 |
| Easiest to use | 1.57 | 0.91 | 0.53 | <.01 2 |
| Best for getting honest answers | 1.30 | 1.16 | 0.54 | <.01 1 |
| Best for privacy after interview | 1.37 | 1.36 | 0.27 | <.01 1 |
| Best for privacy during interview | 1.34 | 1.07 | 0.60 | <.01 1 |
| Overall preference | 1.38 | 1.10 | 0.51 | <.01 2 |
| OBJECTIVE INDICATORS | ||||
| Minutes to Complete | 9.26 | 9.03 | 8.88 | .91 |
| Requests For Help | 0.67 | 1.21 | 0.44 | .02 3 |
| Proportion of Correct Skips | 1.00 | 1.00 | 0.79 | <.01 1 |
| Ns 4 | 35 | 35 | 35 | |
Notes. The first eight rows of this table report means of respondents’ rankings, given on a scale of 0 (low) to 2 (high).
Mean for Paper SAQ was different from means for Video-CASI and Audio-CASI at p < 0.05 by t-test. Means for Video-CASI and Audio-CASI were not significantly different from each other by the same test. There was no significant association between reading level and mean score.
Mean for Paper SAQ was different from means for Video-CASI and Audio-CASI at p < 0.05 by t-test. Means for Video-CASI and Audio-CASI were different from each other at p < 0.05 by t-test. There was no significant association between reading level and mean score.
Mean for Paper SAQ was different from mean for Video-CASI (but not Audio-CASI) with p < 0.05 by t-test. A significant association was found between reading levels and scores (p < .05). (There were, on average, more requests for help from below-average readers [1.02] than from average readers [0.51].)
Ns shown are the minimum sample sizes for calculation of any proportion shown in the column.
In the Audio-CASI administration, questions were displayed on the PC screen simultaneously with their audio presentation. Respondents had the option of turning off this video display, but none did so.