Public intercept interviews and surveys for gathering place-based perceptions: Observations from community water research in Utah

Public intercept surveys or interviews are a straightforward and direct method for gathering data on public perceptions or other locally relevant information. However, compared with Internet, phone, and mail surveys (Dillman, Smyth, and Christian 2014), literature on public intercept survey or interview methods is sparse. While authors of methods textbooks highlight the value of face-to-face interviews for high response rates and usefulness when long, interactive, in-depth interviews are necessary (Neuman 2006; Singleton and Straits 2010), they do not mention shorter and more systematic public intercept interview or survey methods. For research efforts without resources for time-consuming and costly data gathering methods, or without an available sampling frame to identify potential participants, public intercept survey and interview methods can be quite helpful. In addition, when the research topic has a place-based or natural resource focus, certain public places provide salient and convenient opportunities for data gathering (Rookey et al. 2012). Face-to-face survey and interview modes allow for asking more open-ended questions and opportunities for clarification as needed. Further, given a fast-paced society where potential participants generally do not like to be distracted by lengthy, time-consuming survey efforts, there is a need to streamline procedures to reduce time and effort by participants (Dillman et al. 2014). Contemporary technologies, including recording devices, portable tablet computers, and project management software applications, make digitally-enabled intercept surveys quite feasible (Robertson and Boggle 2015), and keep face-to-face interview protocols short and simple.In this paper, we describe a public intercept interview and survey method designed to collect perceptions on water in Utah, with attention to obtaining demographic information to assess the representativeness of participants. We describe involvement of undergraduates in all aspects of the project to show how this method can be adapted for inexperienced research teams, while still attending to protocol and research quality. Our project goals involved research, methods development, and training components. As for research, we sought to gather public perceptions of water issues in a local, community setting. Research questions focused on values and vulnerabilities associated with water, familiar water bodies and assessments of the status of these waters, and the role of community in water issues. In this paper, we limit research findings on water perceptions to illustrations of data types that can be obtained using this method. As to methods development, we sought a mechanism through which we could validate the sample of participants by comparison with local demographic statistics as well as a quick and paperless informed consent and data gathering process, including a way for participants to choose whether they would like to be identified and how they would like their data to be shared. We also endeavored to manage data to ultimately share data to the fullest extent possible given human subjects research limitations. Additionally, training was provided to the research team, not only to ensure careful scientific process and collection of quality data, but also to provide a research experience for undergraduates in social science research design, data collection and management, visualization, and analysis.Literature on Public Intercept SurveysPublic intercept surveys are common in consumer research because of lower costs and usefulness in reaching a local population (Blair, Czaja, and Blair 2014). The "mall intercept" survey used to be a staple of marketing research (Bush and Hair 1985), but was later questioned for sample bias due to changes in shopping populations (Bush and Grant 1995) and avoidance behavior (Keilor and Sutton 1993). Public intercept methods have been used in national parks (Anderson et al. 2010; Ricard, Scherer and Newman 2011; Rookey et al. …