The Impact of Rapport on Data Quality 

in CAPI and Video-mediated Interviews: 

Disclosure of Sensitive Information and 

Item Nonresponse 

Hanyu Sun, Westat 
                   

               

                   

             

Acknowledgement

I would like to thank the Charles Cannell Fund in Survey

Methodology, the Rensis Likert Fund in Research in Survey

Methodology, and the Joint Program in Survey Methodology at the

University of Maryland for generously funding this research.

2 
                 

                       

                   

           

               

               

               

                       

                 

Background

• No universally accepted way to measure rapport, the general

consensus is that it is good for survey interviews and may affect

the quality of the responses obtained (e.g., Foucault, 2010; Lavin

& Maynard, 2001; Cassell & Miller, 2007).

• Although rapport‐related verbal behaviors have been found to

increase the disclosure of moderately sensitive information in

face‐to‐face interactions (e.g., van der Zouwen, Dijkstra, & Smit

1991), it is unknown if rapport can be established to the same

extent in video‐mediated interviews, leading to similar levels of

disclosure.

3 
                 

   

   

     

   

The Hypothesized Effect of Rapport on the Disclosure of

Sensitive Information

More disclosure

of sensitive

information

Rapport

Less disclosure of

sensitive

information

Highly sensitive

questions

Moderately

sensitive

questions

4 
                 

   

                   

             

               

     

                 

               

         

                 

           

Research      Questions and Hypotheses

•Can rapport be similarly established in video‐mediated and computer‐assisted

personal interviews (CAPI)?

•Does the impact of rapport on disclosure depends on question sensitivity?

•Does rapport decrease item nonresponse in interviewer‐administered modes?

•Hypotheses

–Rapport will be lower in video‐mediated interviews than in computer‐

assisted personal interviews (CAPI).

–When questions are moderately or less sensitive, rapport motivates

respondents to provide more honest responses, whereas when questions

are highly sensitive, rapport leads to less honest responses.

–Compared with those in low rapport interviews, respondents in high

rapport interviews will have lower item nonresponse rates.

5 
     

         

             

           

       

                   

                           

                   

         

                                 

Study Design

•2×2×2 experimental design

–Level of rapport (High vs. Low)*

–Mode of data collection (CAPI vs. Video‐mediated Interviews)

–Questionnaire version (Version 1 vs. Version 2)

•A 35‐minute CAPI/video‐mediated interview

•12 female professional interviewers were recruited from the Survey Research

Center at the University of Michigan and then 8 were selected to participate in

the experiment

•128 respondents were recruited from the population of the full‐time

employees at the University of Michigan

*Note: Rapport was used as observational data rather than experimental variable in the analysis. See Study 1

results

6 
               

           

         

             

       

                     

       

Interviewer Screening 

•12 female interviewers were recruited from the Survey

Research Center at the University of Michigan

•Each interviewer administered two CAPI interviews

•Following the interview, each respondent rated the

interviewer’s rapport on two scales

•4 interviewers of the higher rapport ratings and 4 of the

lower rapport ratings were selected

7 
               

           

                       

             

             

     

                   

     

                   

     

Questionnaire

•Tested perceived question sensitivity with Amazon Mechanical Turk

workers

–Recruited 104 MTurkers (52 males and 52 females)

–Rated a random sample of 20‐25 questions on a five‐point Likert scale

measuring question sensitivity (1=extremely unlikely and 5=extremely

likely).

•Divide questions into three categories: nonsensitive, moderately

sensitive, and highly sensitive

–Questionnaire Version 1: Set B in CAPI/video‐mediated interview; Set A

and C in ACASI

–Questionnaire Version 2: Set A in CAPI/video‐mediated Interview; Set B

and C in ACASI

8 
                 

           

               

             

                     

                   

                     

               

                   

   

Results:          Respondents’ and Interviewers’ Rapport

Evaluation

•The respondents’ and interviewers’ mean rapport ratings were 5.21

(n=125, SD=0.76) and 4.81 (n=124, SD=0.74), respectively

•The correlation between the respondents’ and the interviewers’

rapport ratings was small and insignificant (ρ=0.11, p=0.21)

•Interviewers who were rated high in rapport in the screening received

low rapport ratings for some interviews in the experiment, and

interviewers who were rated low in rapport in the screening received

high rapport ratings for some interviews in the experiment

•Used the respondents’ rapport ratings for their individual interviews in

the following analysis

9 
             

                   

   

                   

                     

           

   

Results: CAPI vs. Video‐Mediated Interviews on

Respondents’ Rapport Ratings

• The mean respondents’ rapport ratings for video‐mediated

interviews and CAPI were 5.11 (n=63, SD=0.82) and 5.30 (n=62,

SD=0.68), respectively.

• The test result was not significant ( t=1.40, p=0.16), suggesting

that rapport is just as well established in CAPI as in video‐

mediated interviews.

10 
         

                   

                     

     

                   

                   

         

     

Results: Random‐effects multilevel multinomial logistic

regression analysis on disclosure

• Model 1: Disclosure of sensitive information

喧沈珍 健剣訣 噺 紅待 髪 紅怠警剣穴結珍 髪 紅態迎欠喧喧剣堅建珍 髪 紅戴鯨結券嫌件建件懸件建検沈珍 髪 紅替迎欠喧喧剣堅建珍	 抜 鯨結券嫌件建件懸件建検沈珍 髪 憲珍 髪 綱沈珍 な伐喧沈珍

• When rapport is high, the probability of disclosure for questions

high in sensitivity was 11.52% higher than that for questions low

怠

in sensitivity (繋怠態戴 噺 など.ねば, 喧 隼 ど.どな).

• When rapport is low, the difference on probability of disclosure

between questions high and low in sensitivity was only 2.24%

(n.s.).

11 
     

               

           

             

           

         

       

Results: Random‐effects multilevel multinomial logistic

regression analysis on item nonresponse

• Model 2: Item nonresponse

喧沈珍 健剣訣 噺 紅待 髪 紅怠警剣穴結珍 髪 紅態迎欠喧喧剣堅建珍 髪 紅戴鯨結券嫌件建件懸件建検沈珍 髪 紅替迎欠喧喧剣堅建珍	 抜 鯨結券嫌件建件懸件建検沈珍 髪 憲珍 髪 綱沈珍 な伐喧沈珍

• Question sensitivity had significant effects on item nonresponse

怠 when controlling for mode and rapport (繋怠態戴滞替 噺 なぱば.どひ, 喧 隼

ど.どどどな).

• Interactions between question sensitivity and rapport had

marginally 怠significant effects on item nonresponse (繋怠態戴滞替 噺

ぬ.どに, 喧 噺 ど.どぱ).

12 

               

                   

                 

               

     

                 

Summary

•Rapport

–Rapport increases disclosure of highly sensitive information. But

high rapport also discourages answering at all for highly sensitive

questions

•Mode

–Rapport is not better established in CAPI than video‐mediated

interviews

–Respondents disclose similar levels of sensitive information in

CAPI and video‐mediated interviews

–Item nonresponse rates are similar in CAPI and video‐mediated

interviews

14 
Thank you 

HanyuSun@westat.com 

15