Table 4. Days per person participation during June-August 1960 in various activities on two interviews with reinterview
sample, September 1960, Nationa! Recreation Survey

First interview Percent

Reinter agreement

tem Total sample. interview

sample i sample nn
interview reinterview
a) (2) (3) (4)

Camping doys on vacation . 12 18 98
Fishing days on vacation . 36 34 96
Sightseeing days on vacation . 96 2 84
Swimming . 5.15 4.93 4.53 90
Boating other than sailing and canoeing 1.22 96 90 94
Playing outdoor games and sports . 3.63 2.50 2.40 90
Picnicking . 2.14 Pal 1.68 82
Hiking . 26 38 34 97
Driving for pleasure 6.68 6.60 7.50 a7
Walking for pleasure 434 4.70 5.23 87
Fishing .. 1.9 1.96 2.76 89
Sightseeing. 2.20 2.00 1.63 84
Attending outdoor sports events .........ee cece eee 1.32 1.50 1.42 93
activities was chosen because of high participation sample. Population estimates resulting from these

rather than for representativeness of these groupings.
Conclusion

In summary, a sample of original interviews from
the September 1960, National Recreation Survey,
which covered the June-August 1960 period, have
been compared with a second interview with the same

two interviews have been found to be essentially
the same. Considering that the items selected for
analysis range over the various types of items
included in the survey, we are led to considerable
confidence in the data. It has been suggested that
presence of respondent error is partly a function of
the type of question and the type of activity reported
upon.

102


Table 3. Various vacation, trip, and outing characteristics as reported on two interviews, reinterview

sample, September 1960, Notional Recreation Survey

First interview Percent
Sues- Reinterview agreement
tionnaire| Item Total ierviow
item sample and
No. somple | seinterview
q (3) (4)
13. | Percentage who did not go on vacations, trips, or outings (during
summer) oo... . 20. 10 10 87
14, | Percentage reporting a vacation in last 3 montis:
June. 7 7
July . 4 4
‘August. 13 B
Total 34 34
16. | Percent reporting traveling wees vee wees 93
No vacotion ... 66 65 65
(Original) (Reinterview)
0-72 072.. 4 4
73-200 73-230 4 3
201-325 231-336. 3 4
326-500 337-500 . 5 5
501-600 501-600 3 2
601-800 601-800 3 4
801-1050 801-1100 . 3 4
1051-1600 1101-1600 5 4
1601-2000 1601-2032 2 2
2001-5200 2033-5200 . 3 4
Miles per trip 12.35 928 955
18.|a, Percent reporting days away on vacation . tees
66 65
3 2
: 7 8
7-13 16 18
14-20 5 4
21-over 2 2
21.}h. Total vac eee sees
None 68 68
(Original)
$0 to $1.9 3 3
$2.0 to $5.0 3 3
$5.1 to $9.4 $5.9 to $12.0 6 4
$9.50 $12.6 $12.1 to $16.6. 1 3
$12.7 to $20.0 $16.7 to $21.0 . 3 5
$20.1 to $22.0 $21.1 to $25.0 3 2
$22.1 to $30.1 $25.1 to $30.3 3 2
$30.1 to $44.2 $30.4 to $38.6 2 3
$40.3 to $69.3 $38.7 to $64.2 . 3 3
$69.4 to $201.0 $64.3 to $201.0 4 3
Mean vacation expense ... 23.98 32.76 31.57
23. | Number of trips per person during last 3 months _— 40 26 125
25.| Major purpose of most recent trip, for most frequently mentioned
Purposes .... tee wee 95
Fishing (percent) . 10 4 3
Camping (percent) . 4 3 2
Sightseeing (percent) 3 2 2
Swimming (percent) . 7 1 2
Other (percent). 2 3 5
32.) 0. Naa gating daring ugus 94 1.10 74
32.|b. No. outings during July:
Mean. . 1.06 1.10 .70
32.]¢. No. outing: June;
Mean...... o 92 82 -80



APPENDIX D

REINTERVIEW RESULTS !

As one means of measuring the quality of the sample
results, the National Recreation Survey included an
independent reinterview survey. The second inter-
view, conducted by an interviewer different from the
first one, was made a week to 10 days following the
original interview. The questionnaire used for the
second interview was identical in all respects with
the first questionnaire.

The results of the reinterviews enabled us to measure
in part the effectiveness of the training sessions
and the areas of the questionnaire which needed
improvement in subsequent surveys of this type.
Differences arising between the original interview
and the reinterview provide an indication of difference
attributable to the measurement process.

The reinterview survey was conducted in all four
quarters of the survey year. The relative size of
the reinterview for the September 1960 quarter
was 10 percent of the original interview assignments
located in approximately 75 segments. The reinter-
view sample in December 1960 was half that size
(5 percent) and was 2.5 percent for the March and
dune 1961 surveys. Only results from the September
1960 reinterview survey are presented here, this
being the largest of the reinterview samples.

Method

Results from the original interview and the
reinterview were classified and processed by the
same procedures and methods and each were subjected
to the same quality control methods. The resulting
classification of the two responses to a selected
sample of questions were presented in tables in
which the original response was distributed across
columns and the reinterview response across rows.
Most sample persons reported identically in the two
interviews, but a few respondents did not. Changes
in response were largely self-compensating, so that
the distribution of responses to an item (or question)
for the reinterview sample on the first interview
(that is, the interview which is included in the
September 1960 National Recreation Survey) is quite
similar to the distribution of responses resulting
from the second interview. These distributions will
be compared in the discussion which follows. 2/

Tabulations for this section were prepored by William E.
Enright of the Bureau of the Census.

The sum of the agri responses expressed as a ratio of all
responses sometimes is used to measure response consistency.
Use of the measure presents several difficulties. (1) Is over-
states the error, since perhaps one-half of the responses fall-

Footnote 2 continued in next colunn.

Preferences

Table 1 presents results of selected preference
items. The first column of the table shows the
estimate based upon results for the entire first
survey. For example, the preference for attending
outdoor sports events is presented in part Il, table
1.21, The second column of table 1 shows the same
calculation based upon the first interview with the
sample chosen for reinterview. The third column
shows the estimate based upon the second interview
with the reinterview sample. Comparison of column
1 with column 2 shows the representativeness of the
reinterview sample. Comparison of column 2- with
column 3 shows the consistency of estimate between
the two interviews with the same respondents.
Column 4 shows the percent of respondents giving
consistent responses on the two interviews.

Comparison of the percentage of the sample
expressing various preferences leads to the conclusion
that the percentage estimates are highly consistent.

Preferences, being expressions of attitude, are
expected to vary more, when measured by single
items, than more factual items. However, the degree
of agreement between the two interviews leads to
considerable confidence in the estimates of the
population having particular preferences.

Leisure Hours, Ownership, Income

Table 2 compares items of various types. Hours
per person spent on outdoor recreation on Labor Day
shows a mean decrease between the first and second
interview of 0.19 hours, Interviewers were instructed
to record to the nearest hour andwere told, “‘approxi-
mations are sufficient.’ The final table (table 1.34) is
presented in broad classes,

ing in cells off the diagonal are correct ones. (2) It is @
function of the number of cells in the matrix, since the more
YTesponse categories provide more chances for variation be-
tween the first and second interview, and hence the statistic
cannot easily be compared between matrices of different ranks.
(3) is a function of the morginal distribution; comparison
of the statistic for markedly different distributions is not ap-
Propriote. Other measures of association are discussed by
iam H. Kruskal, “Measures of Asso-
ciotion for Cross Classification,’ Journal of the American
Statistical Association, 49 (December 1954): 732-764. Hf one
moy assume uncorrelated deviations tria! to trial, an estimate
of the response variance may be calculated; Morris H. Hansen,
jam N, Hurwitz, ond Mex A. Bershad, ‘Measurement Er-
rors in Census Surveys,"" Proceedings of the Social Statistics
Section, 1959. Washington, D.C.: American Stotistical Asso-
ciation, 1959. pp. 2-5.



Table 1. Percent preference for various activities on two interviews with reinterview somple,
September 1960, National Recreation Survey

First interview second Percent
Ques- Reinterview |. “econ agreement
oman interview~ | intervi
tionnaire sample— jnterview | imterview
nee Item Total sample | “firey in | Fein j ond reinter-
No. terview sample view
a) (2) (3) (4)
1. [Preference for attending outdoor sports events:
Ist choice 3 3 5
2d choice. 4 4 1
3d choice 5 5 3 cee
AML (1,234) . W 9 9 -87
ISwimming:
Ist cnoice . 22 21 21
2d choice 12 uw n
3d choice . 7 8 8
AIL (1,2,3d) 42 40 40
Walking for Pleasure:
Ist choice 3 3 3
2d choice 3 4 2
3d choice 4 4 5 eee
All (1,2,3d) un 9 u 85
Fishing:
Ist choice 18 9 2
2d choice 9 8 9
3d choice 6 6 4
AIL (1,2,34) 33 33 34
4, |a. Vocation preference, sightseeing— 21 20 24 77
lc. Outing preference for picnicking—percent mentionin; 31 29 30 7
lc. Outing preference for swimming—percent mentioning “4 13 4 87
2. |De you . . . as often as you would like? Yes. 30 7 55
3. |If “‘no”, Why don’t you . . . more often? Lack of time 32 37
Lack of money 6 5
Health reasons . 4 6
Lock of facilities. 9 8
Lack of companion 3 2
Other 13 9
No answer......:..0..05 2 5

Table 2. Leisure ownership of equipment, income and health as reported on two interviews,
reinterview sample, September 1960, National Recreation Survey

First interview Percent
Ques Reinterview agreement,
tionnaire Item Total somple— interview
item sample first and
No. interview sample |, einterview
q) (2) (3) (4)
48, | Average hours of outdoor recreation on Labor Day. 1.75 17 1.58 n
50. |*‘Any other boat’ owned-percent .. 13 8 10 97
Owned ond used—percent 9 6 7 96
51. [Shotgun or rifle owned=percent 38 36 36 92
Owned and used~percent . 18 16 16 90
Golf set~owned percent . 4 4 13 98
Owned and used... 7 5 5 97

99



Table 2. Leisure time, ownership of equipment, income and health as reported on two interviews,

reinterview: sample, September 1949, National Peer

ition Survey—Con.

First interview Second Percent
Oves- jew] econ ‘agreement,
ionnait Reinterview| interview- | “orem
Honnarg Wem Total | sample | seinteriew | interview
i sample __ first sample vein iew
interview
Q (2) (3) (4)
58. |Family income . sees wee sees 67

under $1,500 9.9 12.7 14.5 sees
$1,500 to $2,999. 13.0 13.4 8.4
$3,000 to $4,499. 17.0 13.4 16.0
$4,500 to $5,999. 20.4 21.4 18.9
$6,000 to $7,999. 16.1 23.3 22.6
$8,000 to $9,999. 9.0 6.2 7.6
$10,000 to $14,999, 85 6.2 7.6
$15,000 to $19,999. 1.8 1.8 18
$20,000 and over 13 0.4 0.4
No answer. 29 Ww 22
61. | Health (percent) sees sees see
Excellent . 36 29 33
39 43 37
18 22 20
6 6 9

The ownership items are among the most reliably
reported.3/ The consistency of response is quite
high for owning a boat and a golf set, but is somewhat
lower for owning a shotgun or a rifle. On income
the original interview and reinterview produce closely
corresponding distributions,

Vacation, Trip, and Outing Characte:

Distributions of estimates based upon the two
responses that are presented in table 3 are almost
identical, All of the percentages quite closely agree
and so do the mean number of trips or outings.

The two items showing June, July, and August
separately are of interest, since, with the interviewing
in early September, it was expected that less reliable
results might accrue for events which happened in
June than for more recent events occurring in
August. Since interview and reinterview were a week
or 10 days apart, we may consider that they represent
independent responses and that the time-lapse to
the event reported upon is roughly the same in both
interviews. While none of the statistics by month
differ greatly, the August average outings shows
greater difference than the other 2 months. Hence,
our expectations were not realized, and the quality
of the data reflecting events occurring during the
first month of the quarter are as satisfactory as
those occurring during the last month of the quarter.
In the formal presentation of results, however, only
quarterly totals are shown.

Reports on kind and condition of washing mochines in the
household were consistent, survey to survey, (0.88 and 0.93)
but year acquired was not consistent (0.33) in a recently re-
ported study: Carol M. Jaeger and Jean L. Pennock, ‘An
Analysis of Consistency of Response. in Household Surveys,"”
Journal of the American Statistical Association, 56 (No. 294,
June 1961): 320-327.

100

In analyzing miles traveled on vacation, the reinter-
view results were divided into deciles, just as were
the responses for the entire sample for the first
interview. All but three of the 10 class intervals
were slightly different, the greatest difference being
50 miles. The percentage in the resulting classes
do not differ more than 0.01, and the mean miles
per trip do not differ greatly.

The same procedure as that described above was
followed to determine the difference in class intervals
for total vacation expense. Differences range from
$0.50 to $5.35, with the mean difference being $2.30.
The mean vacation expense from the first interview
was $32.76 and from the second interview, $31.57.

Days away on vacation and major purpose of most
recent trip for the most frequently mentioned purposes
show similar consistency.

Days of Activity per Person

Table 4 presents days participation per person by
various activities. The first three items in the table
are not presented in the published tables, since the
total days participation, irrespective of whether the
days occurred on vacation, trip, or outing, or other-
wise, was used. However, camping and fishing,
each on vacation, show highly consistent results,
and sightseeing days on vacation show fair agreement.

For the remaining activities, the days per person
estimated from interview and reinterview correspond
quite closely. Activities which we have classified
as “passive” in the study show somewhat more
variation between first and second interviews than
activities requiring more exertion. Swimming and
Playing outdoor games and sports, two activities
in which youth participate heavily, are reported
better than the ‘passives’? and not quite as good
as the water activities. However, the sample of