Statistical Analysis of Sensitive Topics in Group and Individual Interviews

By M. Kaplowitz. 2000

106 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Sociology and Political Science, Statistics and Probability

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/9c5ffc325a190c99bda0f66b776aba45266d1a6e

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Sociology and Political Science

1. P. Bazeley
2. Kevin McKenna
3. G. Guest
4. E. Namey
5. Favourate Sebele Mpofu
6. Susan Dean
7. B. Kaiser
8. M. Hennink

In Statistics and Probability

1. P. Bazeley

Citations in the corpus

• Issues in Mixing Qualitative and Quantitative Approaches to Research (2004, background): “Interviews and focus groups generate different information, reflecting public versus private views (Morgan, 1993) and a preparedness to deal with more sensitive issues in interviews (Kaplowitz, 2000).”
• The use of triangulation in qualitative research. (2014, background): “Kaplowitz (2000, 2001) found that IDI interview participants were more likely to discuss sensitive topics and stimulate discussion about different topics when compared to FG participants.”
• Comparing focus groups and individual interviews: findings from a randomized study (2017, background): “In one set of studies (Kaplowitz, 2000; Kaplowitz & Hoehn, 2001), individual interviews were 18 times more likely to raise socially sensitive discussion topics than focus groups.”