A Justice Site
Mirror Sites:
CSUDH - Habermas - UWP - Archives
California State University, Dominguez Hills
University of Wisconsin, Parkside
Soka University Japan - Transcend Art and Peace
Created: April 28, 2003
Latest Update: April 28, 2003
jeannecurran@habermas.org
takata@uwp.edu
Backup of The socio-economic patterning of survey participation and non-response error in a multilevel study of food purchasing behaviour: area- and individual-level characteristics.The socio-economic patterning of survey participation and non-response error in a multilevel study of food purchasing behaviour: area- and individual-level characteristics.Public Health Nutrition, April 2003, vol. 6, no. 2, pp. 181-190(10)
Turrell G.; Patterson C.; Oldenburg B.; Gould T.; Roy M-A.
Queensland University of Technology, School of Public Health, Victoria Park Road, Kelvin Grove, Brisbane, Queensland 4059, Australia
Abstract:
Objective: To undertake an assessment of survey participation and non-response error in a population-based study that examined the relationship between socio-economic position and food purchasing behaviour.
Design and setting: The study was conducted in Brisbane City (Australia) in 2000. The sample was selected using a stratified two-stage cluster design. Respondents were recruited using a range of strategies that attempted to maximise the involvement of persons from disadvantaged backgrounds: respondents were contacted by personal visit and data were collected using home-based face-to-face interviews; multiple call-backs on different days and at different times were used; and a financial gratuity was provided.
Participants: Non-institutionalised residents of private dwellings (n=1003), located in 50 small areas that differed in their socio-economic characteristics.
Results: Rates of survey participation – measured by non-contacts, exclusions, dropped cases, response rates and completions – were similar across areas, suggesting that residents of socio-economically advantaged and disadvantaged areas were equally likely to be recruited. Individual-level analysis, however, showed that respondents and non-respondents differed significantly in their sociodemographic and food purchasing characteristics: non-respondents were older, less educated and exhibited different purchasing behaviours. Misclassification bias probably accounted for the inconsistent pattern of association between the area- and individual-level results. Estimates of bias due to non-response indicated that although respondents and non-respondents were qualitatively different, the magnitude of error associated with this differential was minimal.
Conclusions: Socio-economic position measured at the individual level is a strong and consistent predictor of survey non-participation. Future studies that set out to examine the relationship between socio-economic position and diet need to adopt sampling strategies and data collection methods that maximise the likelihood of recruiting participants from all points on the socio-economic spectrum, and particularly persons from disadvantaged backgrounds. Study designs that are not sensitive to the difficulties associated with recruiting a socio-economically representative sample are likely to produce biased estimates (underestimates) of socio-economic differences in the dietary outcome being investigated.
Keywords: Survey participation; Non-response error; Socio-economic position; Food purchasing
Language: English Document Type: Research article ISSN: 1368-9800.