Comparing Victimization Reporting in Face-to-face Interviews and Self-administered Surveys: A Methodological Experiment with College Students

The results of victimization self-report studies impact theory and justice system practice; therefore, accurate reporting is key. However, due to the sensitive nature of victimization, there are concerns about the accuracy of reports, and research generally assumes that increased reporting is more accurate. Additionally, few studies have examined face-to-face and self-report modes using the ISRD. Further examining the ISRD is important because of its widespread international use. To contribute to this research area, we experimentally examined mode effects on victimization reports using the ISRD3 victimization scale in a sample of college students. We found evidence that respondents in the interviewer-administered condition were more likely to report lifetime victimization experiences, compared to the self-administered condition, but not victimization in the prior year. The present findings are in apparent contradiction to the vast literature on sensitive questions, where the evidence favours self-administered conditions as being more accurate. Our results could be due to the young sample and/or low frequencies of past-year victimization reports. However, results may indicate that mode effects may operate differently for low-sensitivity ISRD items and high-sensitivity (i.e., sexual assault) items, where it is more likely a victim could be blamed.