An analysis of experimenter effects on responses to a sex questionnaire

Abstract

To test whether responses to sex questionnaires vary as a function of the milieu in which the questionnaires are administered, university and college students were presented with an explicit sex questionnaire by a psychologist or by a member of the clergy. In the first study conducted at a nondenominational university, students generally responded similarly when tested by a psychologist, a rabbi, or a priest. There was some evidence suggesting that a greater number of students tested by members of the clergy, rather than by the psychologist, omitted responses to sensitive questions. In a second study conducted at a Catholic college, responses generally were similar when comparing a priest and a psychologist as testers. On one sensitive item, however, there was evidence of an experimenter effect in the predicted direction. Under testing situations common to a number of studies, responses to sex questionnaires seem relatively unaffected by experimenter effects.

Sexual behavior and sexual problems among patients with severe chronic psychoses

“…However, the reliability and validity of the data collected by means of questionnaires are jeopardized by intentional non-reporting or overreporting, incomplete recall, misunderstanding of survey questions, and selective participation [25]. When socially sensitive information regarding sexual behavior is sought, the manner in which the data are collected could seriously distort research findings.Yet, under testing situations common to a number of studies, responses to sex questionnaires seem relatively unaffected by experimenter effects [28]. It has been reported that patients tend to give a more complete sexual history in a face-to-face interview with someone they come to know over time [7].…”

Sex of Experimenter and Social Norm Effects on Reports of Sexual Behavior in Young Men and Women

“…One contextual variable that has not generally been thought to be of great concern is the sex of the person administering the questionnaire in an anonymous, self-report survey (Johnson & Moore, 1993;Tourangeau & Smith, 1996). Indeed, Winer, Makowski, Alpert, and Collins (1988) have demonstrated that college student responses on an anonymous sex survey were generally not affected by the nature of the researcher even if the questionnaire had been administered by a religious leader. Therefore, sex researchers have not been particularly concerned with the sex of the questionnaire administrator, although Ehrhardt (1997) indicated that, with respect to face to face interviews, researchers are reaching a consensus that female interviewers are able to elicit more responses from participants than male interviewers and therefore "may be preferred to men" (p. 361).…”