Collecting Self-Reported Data on Dating Abuse Perpetration From a Sample of Primarily Black and Hispanic, Urban-Residing, Young Adults: A Comparison of Timeline Followback Interview and Interactive Voice Response Methods

Abstract

Dating abuse is a prevalent and consequential public health problem. However, relatively few studies have compared methods of collecting self-report data on dating abuse perpetration. This study compares two data collection methods-(a) the Timeline Followback (TLFB) retrospective reporting method, which makes use of a written calendar to prompt respondents' recall, and (b) an interactive voice response (IVR) system, which is a prospective telephone-based database system that necessitates respondents calling in and entering data using their telephone keypads. We collected 84 days of data on young adult dating abuse perpetration using IVR from a total of 60 respondents. Of these respondents, 41 (68%) completed a TLFB retrospective report pertaining to the same 84-day period after that time period had ended. A greater number of more severe dating abuse perpetration events were reported via the IVR system. Participants who reported any dating abuse perpetration were more likely to report more frequent abuse perpetration via the IVR than the TLFB (i.e., may have minimized the number of times they perpetrated dating abuse on the TLFB). The TLFB method did not result in a tapering off of reported events past the first week as it has in prior studies, but the IVR method did result in a tapering off of reported events after approximately the sixth week. We conclude that using an IVR system for self-reports of dating abuse perpetration may not have substantial advantages over using a TLFB method, but researchers' choice of mode may vary by research question, resources, sample, and setting.

Alcohol, Marijuana, and Dating Abuse Perpetration by Young Adults: Results of a Daily Call Study

“…Participants reported perpetrating physical DA on 84% of DA-perpetration days; insulting or swearing at a partner on 38% of DA-perpetration days; pushing, grabbing, or hitting on 11% of DA-perpetration days; and all other DA acts occurred on ⩽10% of DA-perpetration days. For a more detailed presentation of how frequently each DA act was perpetrated, see Rothman et al (2016).…”

“…There has been one prior retrospective study of alcohol use and same-day DA perpetration in a noncollege attending sample, which found a modest but positive association (Rothman, Stuart, et al, 2012). Because the study used a retrospective design, and recall may have biased results, prospective, longitudinal data may be more informative (Rothman, Heeren, et al, 2016).…”

Increasing disclosure of school-related gender-based violence: lessons from a systematic review of data collection methods and existing survey research

“…There are also several methods which have been tested in adults not children. These include: ACASI with varying levels of anonymity and confidential conditions; [ 55 – 57 ] a timeline follow back retrospective reporting method, [ 58 ] anonymised envelope or postcard, [ 59 ] and a double list experiment. [ 60 ] It may be possible to adapt and use these methods for some age groups of children.…”

Who uses domestic, family, and sexual violence, how, and why? The State of Knowledge Report on Violence Perpetration

“…Self-administered surveys are a favoured form of data collection in violence perpetration research as they provide participants with a high level of perceived confidentiality compared to face-to-face interviews, thus increasing honesty and response rates. [245][246][247] Self-administered surveys are also cost and time effective compared to face-to-face interviews. 242 However, if a researcher is able to form a connection with a participant in a face-to-face setting, there may be increased willingness to disclose sensitive information.…”