RAPID GENDERASSESSMENT
ON THE IMPACT
VIOLENCE AGAINSTWOMENTECHNICAL REPORT - THAILAND SURVEY FIELDWORK
MAY - JUNE 2021

1 Introduction
Prompted by strong concern that the COVID-19 pandemic has intensified the risk of different forms ofviolence against women and girls, particularly intimate partner/domestic violence, and realizing the need tocollect reliable data that are in line with methodological, safety and ethical standards, UN Womencommissioned Ipsos to conduct a study on the impact of COVID-19 on women’s well-being and safety in 13
countries across several regions all over the world. The participating countries were Albania, Bangladesh,
Cameroon, Colombia, Côte d’Ivoire, Jordan, Kenya, Kyrgyzstan, Morocco, Nigeria, Paraguay, Thailand andUkraine.
The core objectives of the study were to:•collect data on the impacts of COVID-19 on violence against women in low- and middle-income
countries.

•

strengthen measurement and methodologies for violence against women data collection and use.

•strengthen available knowledge on all forms of violence against women and improve capacities tocollect, analyse and use data on violence against women in accordance with globally agreed
methodological, safety and ethical standards.

•

inform where the policy and programmatic response of UN Women should focus and support
UN system-wide efforts to scale up actions to address violence against women in the context of
COVID-19.

The following groups contributed to the project’s management and execution:1.

the UN Women project team, comprising statisticians, researchers and policy specialists;

2. the Technical Advisory Group – an external reference group established by UN Women to provide
independent technical advice and expertise to the project;
3. the Ipsos project team involved in the set-up and delivery of the study; and4. national fieldwork partners.

1

Methodology of the study
Target group
TimingData collection method
Sampling approach
Sample Size

Questionnaire lengthand type

Women aged 18 +•Two-phased approach: Phase I (four countries) took place May–June 2021;
Phase II (nine countries) took place August–September 2021

Computer-Assisted Telephone Interview (CATI)•

Random probability sampling with monitoring of quota on age and region•

Random-digit dialling to mobile sample frames•

1,200 women aged 18+ per country•

Target duration of max. 20 minutes•

No open-ended answers•

Informed consent asked to each participant at the beginning of the interview•

Awareness of safety, privacy and confidentiality of women respondents•

Guided by the “do no harm” principle applicable to the women respondents
and the interviewers/research team•The questionnaire was adapted in each country by localizing characters’
names and cultural references (i.e., popular food, music, sports).

ScriptingCentral scripting in software applications - iField and Dimensions

Language

At least one main language per country

The country chapters provide information on the set-up of the data collection process (obtaining of ethicalclearance, sampling and translation), description of the fieldwork, main characteristics of the achieved
sample by several indicators (age group, region, area type, educational attainment), technical information(interview duration, contact outcomes, screen-outs, temporary interview suspension at safety questions,survey dropouts, use of safety word, and item non-response), key field observations and relevant lessons
and recommendations.

22 Country information
2.1

Thailand2.1.1 Obtaining ethical clearance
UN Women sought general support or tacit approval for the study from the National Statistical Office ofThailand (TNSO). The ‘no objection’ from the TNSO was granted on 23 March 2021 in support of the project.

2.1.2 Sampling plan
A single-frame cell-phone random-digit dialling (RDD) survey design was used to reach a nationally
representative sample of women aged 18+. The sample mirrored the telephone database distribution (framesize) by provider.1 The gross (unscreened) sample included numbers for each of the providers in the country
to the same proportions as in the frame size. In 2019, the smartphone penetration in Thailand was 92%.2
Of the 244,700,000 numbers available in the sample frame, 125,098,000 (51%) were expected to beworking numbers (based on cell subscriptions in 2018). The sample was pulsed, meaning that a signal wassent to the randomly generated phone number to verify if the number existed (i.e., if a connection could beachieved). The upfront pulsing of the gross sample closely reflected the market shares of the different
operators (in terms of subscriptions). The sample was also screened against business registers so as to
exclude numbers that were used by companies. Further details on the sampling frame are provided in
section 2.4.1 of the main technical report.
Due to the challenges in reaching older women (50+), and with the approval of UN Women, the field team
supplemented the RDD sample with a contact database that they had built based on previous surveys. The
database comprised people who had participated in general population CATI surveys and consented tobeing recontact for future studies. It included about 200 numbers belonging to women aged 50+, andincluded mobile and landline numbers, as well as information on the age and gender of the contacts. This
database was used only for the purposes of reaching respondents aged 60 and above. Further, only mobile
phones were called to adhere to the design of the survey and ensure that ethical and safety considerations
were in place.
To ensure a representative sample, quotas were set on age (18–29, 30–39, 40–49, 50–59, 60+) and region(first-level administrative division), using the following statistical sources:

1 AIS GSM (Advanced Info Service PLC) 116,900,000; DTAC (Total Access Communications Co.) 69,700,000; MY (by CAT) 10,600,000; TOT Mobile
7,200,000; True Move 40,300,000.
2 GSMA. 2019. Mobile Economic Impact: Thailand. https://www.gsma.com/betterfuture/wp-content/uploads/2019/08/Mobile-Economic-Impact2019-Thailand.pdf

3•

Age: TNSO. 2020. Number of Population from Registration by Age, Sex and Province.3•

Region: TNSO. 2020. Number of Population from Registration by Age, Sex and Province.4

2.1.3 Translation
The questionnaire was translated into Thai. No issues related to equivalence (conceptual equivalence,
semantic equivalence, etc.) were encountered during translation.
The questionnaire required localization for several items in the text of the questions and answers, including
widely known, yet neutral in meaning, male and female names, which were used in the vignettes in the
Safety Section of the survey. In Thailand, the male name used was Chai and the female, Ying.

2.1.4 Fieldwork period
Fieldwork took place between 30 April and 18 June 2021, longer than anticipated due to a very high refusal
rate in the first three weeks of fieldwork (by May 19th). There were also various public holidays5 during theperiod that slightly impeded progress. Additional measures were thus put in place to increase the survey
pace and reduce refusal rate: (1) additional training of interviewers; (2) allocation of extra interviewers (52 intotal); (3) allocation of extra gross sample (RDD mobile lines); and (4) mention of the coordination donewith the Thai Ministry of Social Development and Human Security (Department of Women’s Affairs andFamily Development) and the National Statistical Office of Thailand to conduct the survey. With measuresin place, most of the interviews (795) were completed by the end of May, with the remainder completed in
the first half of June. During the latter period, the focus was on reaching women aged 50+. At the end offieldwork, response rate was recorded at 7%.

2.1.5 Achieved sample
In total, 1,202 valid interviews were completed in Thailand. The targets for the age groups 50–59 and 60+
were not quite reached, with a shortfall of 2 percentage points in each group.
Table 1: Achieved sample, by age group (Thailand)
Completed %(unweighted)

Weighted%6

Difference
unweighted %vs. target %7

Difference
weighted %vs. target %TargetTarge %

Completed(unweighted)

18–29

240

20%

263

22%

20%

2%

0%

30–39

213

18%

227

19%

18%

1%

0%

40–49

238

20%

257

21%

20%

2%

0%

50–59

228

19%

204

17%

19%

-2%

0%

60+

279

23%

251

21%

23%

-2%

0%

Age group

3 http://statbbi.nso.go.th/staticreport/page/sector/en/01.aspx
4 Ibid.
5 On 03/05, 04/05, 10/05, 26/05 and 03/06.
6 Weighting procedures are discussed in more detail in section 4.4.2 of the main technical report.
7 The figures in this column reflect the actual difference of the unweighted and target percentages. Any variations are caused by the rounding up of
the percentages in the table.

4

The field team had difficulties reaching the target in the Northeast region, where the number of completedinterviews was 11 percentage points below the set target. The relaxation of the regional quota towards theend of fieldwork, to give priority to interviewing older women, meant that the shortfalls were not addressed
during this time. Nonetheless, the number of completed interviews per region still allowed for effective
weighting.
Table 2: Achieved sample, by region (Thailand)
Completed(unweighted)

Completed %(unweighted)

Weighted%

Difference
unweighted %vs. target %8

Difference
weighted % vs.
target %RegionTargetTarget
%

North

217

18%

241

20%

18%

2%

0%

Northeast

395

33%

265

22%

33%

-11%

0%

South

163

14%

182

15%

14%

2%

0%

Central

243

20%

278

23%

20%

3%

0%

Greater
Bangkok

182

15%

236

20%

15%

5%

0%

The distribution across rural (30% weighted) and urban (70% weighted) areas (as self-reported byrespondents) deviated from World Bank estimates, which put the total rural population at 49%.9 Of course,
it needs to be borne in mind that a cell phone sampling frame was used. Latest available data suggests thatmobile Internet use in low- and middle-income countries – which can be used as an indicator for cell phone
use in general – stands at 34% in rural areas, compared to 54% in urban areas. There is also a gender gap in
mobile Internet use: in 2019, women were 20% less likely than men to use mobile Internet.10
Table 3: Achieved sample, by area type (Thailand)
Area

Completed (unweighted)

Completed %(unweighted)

Weighted %

Urban

864

72%

70%

Rural

338

28%

30%

A high proportion of the sample had attended a tertiary education programme (49%).11 The number of those
who had completed primary education or less was 8%.

8 The figures in this column reflect the actual difference of the unweighted and target percentages. Any variations are caused by the rounding up of
the percentages in the table.
9 World Bank staff estimates based on the United Nations Population Division's World Urbanization Prospects: 2018 Revision.
10 GSMA. 2020. The State of Mobile Internet Connectivity 2020.https://www.gsma.com/r/wp-content/uploads/2020/09/GSMA-State-of-MobileInternet-Connectivity-Report-2020.pdf
11 Women’s tertiary school enrolment in 2016 was 58%. UNESCO Institute for Statistics (uis.unesco.org). Data as of September 2020.

5

Table 4: Achieved sample, by educational attainment (Thailand)
Area

Completed (unweighted)

Completed % (unweighted)

Weighted %No formal education

6

1%

1%

Completed primary school

87

7%

8%

Completed secondary school

310

26%

27%

Technical & vocational training

211

18%

18%

Completed university/college

557

46%

44%

Completed post graduate

30

3%

3%

Don't know

1

0%

0%

Refused00%0%2.1.6 Quality control and data processing
Eighteen interviews were removed from the Thailand sample because they did not meet the quality criteria
in terms of length, straight-lining and/or item non-response. (Section 4.4 of the main technical reportprovides a detailed description of the implemented quality control procedures and how data were
processed).

2.1.7 Technical information
The interview duration was above the envisaged 20 minutes, at 24 minutes on average (compared with amean of 25 minutes across the four countries). Quite some time during the screening was spent on
explaining how the phone number was obtained and how the data will be used.
Table 5: Interview duration (Thailand)
MeanMedianStandard deviation

24.05

22.48

10.63

The response rate in Thailand was 7%, calculated using the first American Association for Public Opinion
Research (AAPOR) definition – that is, the number of complete interviews divided by the number ofinterviews (complete plus partial) plus the number of non-interviews (refusal and break-off plus noncontacts plus others) plus all cases of unknown eligibility (unknown if housing unit, plus unknown, other).12
The table below shows the incidence of each outcome code.

12 AAPOR. 2015. Standard Definitions. https://www.aapor.org/AAPOR_Main/media/MainSiteFiles/Standard-Definitions2015_8thEd.pdf

6

Table 6: Contact outcomes (Thailand)Contact outcomesCount% of all outcomes

Fixed appointment

20%Soft appointment/

0%

Incomplete interview with call-back to resume later/0%

Telephone answering device / voicemail / message service/0%

Busy / engaged/

0%

No answer

10,85660%

Complete

1,202

7%

Screen-out

510

3%

Incomplete interview with no call-back (terminated)

332

2%

Immediate refusal (before eligibility of respondent has been confirmed)

106

1%

Refusal by eligible respondent (after eligibility of respondent has been
confirmed, but before the actual interview started)

3,885

21%

Respondent never available for appointment

110%

Deceased respondent/0%

Respondent physically or mentally unable / incompetent/0%

Respondent or household language problem/

0%

Call blocking / barring / do not call list/

0%

Fax / data line / modem / pager/

0%

Non-working / disconnected / dead / bad number

1,182

7%

Non-residential number (business, government office, other organization)/

0%

Technical issue / CATI system error/0%

Table 7 provides an overview of specific call outcomes (completed interview, partial interview and refusals)
by the time of the day (morning, afternoon, evening) and the day of the week. The figures should beinterpreted with caution, as they do not reflect the percentage of all contact attempts performed during thistime/on that day, but the split of these specific outcomes across the time of the day/day of the week.
Feedback from the field team on the best time and the best day to obtain an interview is provided in
section 2.1.8.

7

Table 7: Call outcome, by time of the day and day of the week (Thailand)

SundayMondayTuesday

WednesdayThursdayFridaySaturdayCompleted interviews

Partial interviews

Refusals

Count

%

Count

%

Count

%

Morning

6

0%

1

2%

8

0%

Afternoon

129

11%

6

10%

377

11%

Evening

77

6%

2

3%

89

2%

Morning

10

1%

0

0%

0

0%

Afternoon

83

7%

5

8%

135

4%

Evening

75

6%

4

7%

118

3%

Morning

8

1%

0

0%

7

0%

Afternoon

67

5%

2

3%

212

6%

Evening

69

6%

2

3%

88

2%

Morning

12

1%

0

0%

10

0%

Afternoon

104

9%

3

5%

307

9%

Evening

76

6%

8

13%

223

6%

Morning

7

1%

0

0%

11

0%

Afternoon

69

6%

8

13%

302

8%

Evening

64

5%

3

5%

346

10%

Morning

13

1%

0

0%

14

0%

Afternoon

80

7%

3

5%

434

12%

Evening

74

6%

5

8%

157

4%

Morning

6

0%

1

2%

50

1%

Afternoon

82

7%

5

8%

406

11%

Evening

108

9%

2

3%

278

8%

Twenty-two per cent of the sample called were men and thus screened out at the very beginning of thesurvey. Four per cent were screened out because they were below 18 years old. A large proportion (71%) of thewomen who answered the screener questions on sex and age said at S1 that they were not willing toparticipate. An additional 12 respondents did not understand the purpose of the survey and confidentiality
measures so were screened out accordingly.

8

Table 8: Screen-outs (Thailand)
Question

AnswerCount% of total answered

S3

Sex: Male

1 629

22%

S4_1

Age: Below 18 years

201

4%

S1

Willing to participate: No

3 643

71%

S6

Understand purpose: No

11

1%

S7

Understand confidentiality: No

1

0%

The interview was temporarily discontinued in 54 cases because the respondent answered “no” to one of thefive ‘safety’ questions (listed in the table below).
Table 9: Temporary interview suspension due to responses to safety questions (Thailand)
Question

AnswerCount% of total answered

S2

Can you let me know if the speaker phone is off? No

23

2%

S5

Can you confirm if now is a good time? No

14

1%

B01

Can you confirm that there is no one around you over the age of 2
that can overhear our conversation? No

1

0%

C18

Alternatively, if someone over age 2 is listening to our call or is nearby
that can hear, please say no. No

13

1%

C27

If someone over the age of 2 is listening to our call or is nearby that
can hear, please say no. No

30%

Sixty respondents dropped out of the survey. The table below shows the questions at which the dropout
occurred. The relatively high number of dropouts at S9 (the district the respondent lived in) and S11 (whether
the respondent lived in a rural or urban area) may simply reflect a spontaneous decision at the beginning of
the survey not to continue, rather than any particular concerns on the part of respondents about the natureof these questions.
Table 10: Survey dropouts, by question (Thailand)
Question

Question text

No. ofparticipants
dropped out% of total
dropped out
respondents

S9

And what district do you live in?

16

26.7%

S11

Would you consider the area you live in to be urban or rural?

9

15%

A01

What is your marital status?

5

8.3%

A05

Do you have difficulty doing any of the following – walking, seeing(even when wearing classes), hearing (even with hearing
assistance), remembering or concentrating, self-caring orcommunicating?

1

1.7%

A07

How many of the people living in your household are age 0–17?

1

1.7%

9

Question

Question text

No. ofparticipants
dropped out

A08

How many of the people living in your household are elderly, aged
65 or over? Please include yourself if that is appropriate.

1

1.7%

A09

Who do you consider to be the head of your household?

2

3.3%

A10

What was the monthly income of your household BEFORE COVID19?

4

6.7%

A12

During the last month, was there a time when, because of lack ofmoney or other resources, you or others in your household…

4

6.7%

B02

For each question, I will ask how often you thought or felt a certain
way – please answer with never, almost never, sometimes, fairly
often or very often. In the last month, how often did you feel…

3

5.0%

B04

Overall, would you say your own mental or emotional health (e.g.,stress, anxiety, confidence, etc.) has been affected AS A RESULT OF
COVID-19?

1

1.7%

C02

To what extent, if at all, do you feel safe when walking alone in thearea where you live during the day?

1

1.7%

C03

To what extent, if at all, do you feel safe when walking alone in thearea where you live at night?

1

1.7%

C08

How, if at all, do you think physical harm, abuse or harassment in
the area where you live have changed SINCE COVID-19?

1

1.7%

C09

Have you personally experienced physical harm or threats ofphysical harm, abuse or harassment specifically by the police or
security agents in the context of implementing restrictions to
respond to COVID-19 (movement restriction, curfew, closure ofcertain premises)?

1

1.7%

C10

How common do you think this story is for women in the area
where you live?

3

5.0%

C11

Would you say COVID-19 has made things better, worse or the samefor [Scripter: insert Female name] from this story?

1

1.7%

C17

Who would [Scripter: insert Female name] most likely seek help
from?

1

1.7%

C30

Which, if any, of the following have you or any other woman you
know experienced SINCE THE START OF COVID-19?

1

1.7%

S12

And as a final question, I would like to know if you have anothermobile phone number besides the one I am calling you on? IF YES:
How many other mobile phone numbers do you have?

3

5.0%

Total

60

100%

10

% of total
dropped out
respondents

As previously explained, and as part of the safety protocols, respondents were given a safe word, a specificpopular local food (PLF), that they could use if they were disturbed by a third party or otherwise felt unsafe
at any point during the interview. In Thailand, the food used was “ต้มยํากุง้ ” (Tom Yum Kung – spicy prawn soup).
This word was used 43 times during the course of fieldwork. The table below shows the questions at which
this occurred.
Table 11: Use of popular local food, per question (Thailand)
Question

Question text

PLF mentioned

S5

I’d like to make sure you are in a quiet, private place where you will not be
overheard before we start the study. Can you confirm if now is a good time?

1

S7

Do you understand that your information will remain confidential and that you
are able to revise and/or ask to delete any information you provide?

2

S8

What region in [COUNTRY] do you live in?

1

S9

And what district do you live in?

5

S11

Now we just need a bit more information about you. Would you consider the area
you live in to be urban or rural?

1

A01

What is your marital status?

2

A07

How many of the people living in your household are age 0–17?

1

A10

What was the monthly income of your household BEFORE COVID-19?

1

A12

During the last month, was there a time when, because of lack of money or otherresources, you or others in your household…

1

B02

For each question, I will ask how often you thought or felt a certain way – pleaseanswer with never, almost never, sometimes, fairly often, or very often. In the lastmonth, how often did you feel…
1. … that you were unable to control the important things in your life?
2. … confident about your ability to handle your personal problems?
3. … difficulties were piling up so high that you could not overcome them?

1

C02

To what extent, if at all, do you feel safe when walking alone in the area where
you live during the day?

1

C04

How, if at all, has your feeling of safety while walking alone at night changed
SINCE THE ONSET OF COVID-19?

1

C05

Discrimination happens when you are treated less favourably compared to othersor harassed because of your sex, age, disability, socioeconomic status, place ofresidence, political opinion, or any other characteristics. Have you personallyexperienced any form of discrimination against you SINCE COVID-19?

1

C07

To what extent do you think that violence, abuse or harassment are a problem in
the area where you live?

2

C08

How, if at all, do you think physical harm, abuse or harassment in the area where
you live have changed SINCE COVID-19?

1

11

Question

Question text

PLF mentioned

C09

Have you personally experienced physical harm or threats of physical harm, abuseor harassment specifically by the police or security agents in the context of
implementing restrictions to respond to COVID-19 (movement restriction, curfew,
closure of certain premises)?

1

C10

How common do you think this story is for women in the area where you live?

2

C23

Why do you feel unsafe in your home?

1

C28A

Please tell me how many of the following statements you regard as true SINCETHE ONSET OF COVID-19:

1

C28B

Please tell me how many of the following statements you regard as true SINCETHE ONSET OF COVID-19:

1

C30

Which, if any, of the following have you or any other woman you know
experienced SINCE THE START OF COVID-19?

2

C31

Do you have any suggestions or recommendations of what we could do forwomen suffering from violence during the pandemic?

9

Unknown

4
Total

43

In terms of item non-response (INR), this varied across the survey but was highest at C31_6 (19%). Herethough, INR can also be understood as a “no” to the question of whether the respondent has any suggestions
or recommendations of what we could do for women suffering from violence during the pandemic. Other
questions had a very low INR.
Table 12: Item non-response (Thailand)
Question

Question text

Item nonresponse

A02

What is the highest level of education that you completed?

0.08%

A03

Which of the following best describes what you mainly do each day…?

0.08%

A05

Do you have difficulty doing any of the following – walking, seeing (even when wearingclasses), hearing (even with hearing assistance), remembering or concentrating, selfcaring, or communicating?

0.08%

A07

How many of the people living in your household are age 0–17?

0.75%

A08

How many of the people living in your household are elderly, aged 65 or over? Please
include yourself if that is appropriate.

0.58%

A09

Who do you consider to be the head of your household?

0.33%

A10

What was the monthly income of your household BEFORE COVID-19?

2.08%

A11

Has this changed at all in the past year?

0.17%

A12_2

During the last month, was there a time when, because of lack of money or otherresources, you or others in your household…were unable to eat healthy and nutritious
food?

0.08%

12

A12_3

During the last month, was there a time when, because of lack of money or otherresources, you or others in your household…ate only a few kinds of food?

0.08%

A12_4

During the last month, was there a time when, because of lack of money or otherresources, you or others in your household…had to skip a meal?

0.08%

A12_8

During the last month, was there a time when, because of lack of money or otherresources, you or others in your household…went without eating for a whole day?

0.08%

B03

Thinking about these topics I've mentioned, would you say the COVID-19 situation has
made these difficulties better, worse or the same?

0.08%

B04

Overall, would you say your own mental or emotional health (e.g., stress, anxiety,confidence, etc.) has been affected AS A RESULT OF COVID-19?

0.25%

C02

To what extent, if at all, do you feel safe when walking alone in the area where you live
during the day?

0.17%

C03

To what extent, if at all, do you feel safe when walking alone in the area where you liveat night?

0.33%

C04

How, if at all, has your feeling of safety while walking alone at night changed SINCE THE
ONSET OF COVID-19?

0.50%

C05

Discrimination happens when you are treated less favourably compared to others or
harassed because of your sex, age, disability, socioeconomic status, place of residence,
political opinion or any other characteristics. Have you personally experienced any formof discrimination against you SINCECOVID-19?

2.00%

C06

Do you feel that discrimination, prejudice or racism in the area where you live havechanged SINCE THE ONSET OF COVID-19?

1.00%

C07

To what extent do you think that violence, abuse or harassment is a problem in the area
where you live?

0.92%

C08

How, if at all, do you think physical harm, abuse or harassment in the area where youlive have changed SINCE COVID-19?

2.08%

C09

Have you personally experienced physical harm or threats of physical harm, abuse or
harassment specifically by the police or security agents in the context of implementing
restrictions to respond to COVID-19 (movement restriction, curfew, closure of certain
premises)?

3.83%

C10

How common do you think this story is for women in the area where you live?

2.16%

C11

Would you say the situation of COVID-19 has made things better, worse or the same for[Scripter: insert Female name] from this story?

1.16%

C12

Do you think [Scripter: insert Female name] would seek help for this situation?

1.50%

C13

Who would [Scripter: insert Female name] most likely seek help from?

0.25%

C14

How common do you think this story is for women in the area where you live?

2.16%

C15

Would you say the situation of COVID-19 has made things better, worse or the same for[Scripter: insert Female name] from this story in terms of her feelings of safety?

0.67%

C16

Do you think [Scripter: insert Female name] would seek help for this situation?

1.50%

13

C17

Who would [Scripter: insert Female name] most likely seek help from?

0.08%

C19

How often in the last six months would you say that adults in your household haveargued or have had some sort of conflict among themselves?

1.91%

C20

Would you say the situation of COVID-19 has made conflict between adults in yourhousehold more frequent, less frequent or about the same?

1.50%

C21

In the last six months, did you ever feel unsafe in your home?

0.17%

C22

Would you say COVID-19 has made things better, worse or the same in terms of how
safe you feel in your home?

0.17%

C23_1

Why do you feel unsafe in your home? I have a serious medical condition or disability
and feel vulnerable

0.25%

C23_2

Why do you feel unsafe in your home? My shelter is insecure from external threats (e.g.,there are no locks on my front door)

0.25%

C23_3

Why do you feel unsafe in your home? I am unable to communicate/reach out for help

0.25%

C23_4

Why do you feel unsafe in your home? I am living with people I cannot trust

0.33%

C23_5

Why do you feel unsafe in your home? There is substance abuse (e.g., alcohol or drugs)in the household

0.25%

C23_6

Why do you feel unsafe in your home? There is physical violence or threats of physicalviolence in my home

0.25%

C23_7

Why do you feel unsafe in your home? There is verbal abuse in my home

0.25%

C23_8

Why do you feel unsafe in your home? Other adults in the household have hurt me

0.25%

C23_9

Why do you feel unsafe in your home? Other adults in the household have been hurt

0.25%

C23_10Why do you feel unsafe in your home? Children in the household have been hurt

0.25%

C23_11

Why do you feel unsafe in your home? Something else

0.75%

C25

Do you still continue to see or speak with your friends and social groups?

0.08%

C28A

Please tell me how many of the following statements you regard as true SINCE THE
ONSET OF COVID-19:

0.33%

C28B

Please tell me how many of the following statements you regard as true SINCE THE
ONSET OF COVID-19:

0.25%

C29A

Please tell me how many of the following statements you regard as true SINCE THE
ONSET OF COVID-19:

0.42%

C29B

Please tell me how many of the following statements you regard as true SINCE THE
ONSET OF COVID-19:

0.42%

C30_1

Which, if any, of the following have you or any other woman you know experienced
SINCE THE START OF COVID-19? Been slapped, hit, kicked, had things thrown at them, orother physical harm

0.17%

C30_3

Which, if any, of the following have you or any other woman you know experienced
SINCE THE START OF COVID-19? Had resources (like health care) or basic needs (likemoney, food, water, shelter) denied

0.17%

14

C30_4Which, if any, of the following have you or any other woman you know experienced
SINCE THE START OF COVID-19? Been forced to stay alone for long period of time ordenied communication with other people

0.25%

C30_5

Which, if any, of the following have you or any other woman you know experienced
SINCE THE START OF COVID-19? Been the subject of inappropriate jokes, suggestive
comments, leering, or unwelcome touch/kisses

0.08%

C31_1

Do you have any suggestions or recommendations of what we could do for women
suffering from violence during the pandemic? Information about security/crime
prevention

0.83%

C31_2

Do you have any suggestions or recommendations of what we could do for women
suffering from violence during the pandemic? Access to basic needs such as shelter,
food, clothing

0.42%

C31_3

Do you have any suggestions or recommendations of what we could do for women
suffering from violence during the pandemic? Medical and financial support

0.67%

C31_4

Do you have any suggestions or recommendations of what we could do for women
suffering from violence during the pandemic? Someone to talk to like professional
mental health experts

0.50%

C31_5

Do you have any suggestions or recommendations of what we could do for women
suffering from violence during the pandemic? Legal support or help in reporting theincident or dealing with police

0.75%

C31_6

Do you have any suggestions or recommendations of what we could do for women
suffering from violence during the pandemic? Other, specify

19.13%

S12

And as a final question, I would like to know if you have another mobile phone number
besides the one I am calling you on? IF YES: How many other mobile phone numbers do
you have?

1.50%

2.1.8 Field observations
This section describes the observations made by Field Managers and interviewers in the course of fieldwork.
The observations relate to the most productive days for fieldwork; the main reasons for refusing to take partin the survey; challenges reaching certain age groups; and the clarity of terms, concepts and questions,among other topics. The observations effectively complement the fieldwork statistics included in theprevious section, providing a more nuanced picture of the fieldwork experience.
•

The weekend worked best to obtain interviews, because contact could more often be establishedthen than on working days. Late afternoon/evening (around 4 to 7 pm) was the best time of the day
to call the sample and conduct an interview.

•

Appointments were scheduled in cases where respondents could not take part in an interview
straight away. However, only about 40% of appointments actually resulted in a completedinterview; in most cases, the respondents could not be reached at the agreed appointment time.

•

The main reasons for refusals to take part in the survey were a lack of time to participate and thelength of the survey, no interest in participating, and scepticism among respondents as to how
their phone number had been obtained.

15

•

Older women (50–59 and 60+) were the most challenging group among which to achieveinterviews. This was because they were less represented in the RDD sample, not because they weremore likely to refuse: more than twice as many women aged 18–29 and 30–39 refused (78 and 80%,
respectively) than women aged 60+ (32%) at S1. Only about half of women aged 50–59 (55%)
refused to be checked for eligibility, whereas 66% of those aged 40–49 did so.

•

No respondent asked for the telephone number of the local support organization.

In terms of observations relating to the survey questionnaire:•

Most respondents said that the survey had been too long.

•

C28 and C29 (the questions asking how many statements were true since the onset of COVID-19)
were difficult for older respondents to understand and the interviewer needed to repeat thequestion and statements.

•

Terms and concepts such as “harassment” and “discrimination” were generally understood, andconceptual equivalence was confirmed by the field team.

•Overall, respondents did not perceive the questions as sensitive (or at least did not express this in
any way) and no emotional reactions – or specifically distress – were observed by interviewers.

•

Some respondents did not understand right away the purpose of the use of the popular local foodand required further explanations by the interviewer. Thereafter, the popular local food was used byrespondents as intended when a third party interrupted the call.

2.1.9 Lessons learned and recommendations
This section draws upon the fieldwork statistics and observations outlined in the previous sections to provide
recommendations for future surveys on violence against women in Thailand. – specifically, whether remote
data collection can be considered as an appropriate approach to develop an evidence base on perceptions
and incidence.
•

Considering various challenging elements of the fieldwork in Thailand, such as the high refusal rate
(specially at S1), the low response rate of 7%, and thus the very resource-intensive nature of thework, face-to-face interviewing may be more appropriate for surveys on violence against women in
the country. Face-to-face interviewing is more commonly used in Thailand and a lower refusal rate
has typically been observed in such studies. A face-to-face approach might also help to address thechallenges of reaching women aged 50+ and ensuing representativity across rural and urban areas.

•

The challenges in reaching older women and those living in certain regions should be reflected in
the time dedicated to active data collection in future surveys with age- and region-based quotas. A
longer fieldwork period would help to ensure the quotas are uniformly achieved. In the case of aface-to-face approach, a longer fieldwork period would be absolutely necessary owing to the extra
time required for physical visits to prospective respondents’ homes.

•

Given the feedback on interview length and the high drop-out rate compared to the othercountries, it is recommended that the questionnaire be reduced to 15 minutes – or at the very least
ensure that the questionnaire does not exceed the 20-minute target, as is currently the case.

16© 2022 UN Women. All rights reserved.
The views expressed in this publication arethose of the author(s) and do not necessarily
represent the views of UN Women, the United
Nations or any of its affiliated organizations.
Produced by the Women Count programme
Research partner: Ipsos
Editor: Jen Ross
Design: Ouissal Hmazzou

220 East 42nd Street
New York, New York 10017, USA
data.unwomen.org
www.unwomen.org
www.facebook.com/unwomen
www.twitter.com/un_women
www.youtube.com/unwomen
www.flickr.com/unwomen
instagram.com/unwomen