敏感性問題訪問調查的挑戰：以婦女遭受親密伴侶暴力為例

Challenges of Sensitive Question on the National Interview Survey: The Case of Intimate Partner Violence against Women

10.6171/ntuswr.202312_(48).0002

林東龍(Dong-Long Lin)；林雅容(Ya-Jung Lin)；劉一龍(Yi-Long Liu)；潘淑滿(Shu-Man Pan)

親密伴侶暴力 ； 訪問調查 ； 敏感性問題 ； 項目不回應 ； 無回覆率 ； intimate partner violence ； interview survey ； sensitive questions ； item nonresponse ； nonresponse rates

臺大社會工作學刊

48期（2023 / 12 / 01）

37 - 67

繁體中文;英文

社工研究經常涉及敏感性議題，卻很少進行全國性調查資料收集。敏感性問題訪問調查最大的挑戰，來自研究樣本的代表性、研究品質與成效。本文以參與IPV訪問調查訪員為研究對象，透過四次焦點團體訪談，瞭解在訪問調查過程遭遇的困難及其因應。研究發現，當訪問調查運用於IPV議題時挑戰有三：（一）能否「接觸」樣本，影響研究代表性，但都會與偏鄉面對的困境不同；（二）降低情境干擾，能增加合作意願，也能降低對研究品質的負面影響；（三）釐清對IPV的疑慮與認識，促進合作意願，也提升研究成效。雖然訪問調查運用在IPV議題遭遇上述挑戰，相較於電話調查或郵寄問卷調查等，仍是較適合的調查方法，甚至可以帶來受訪者增能效果。建議未來相關議題研究，應加強訪員訓練與督導及結合電腦輔助工具，不僅符合時間、經濟成本考量，也能降低資料登錄錯誤。

Sensitive issues often become topics of social work research, yet few researchers collect data via national interview surveys. Concerns regarding the respondents' representativeness, nonresponse rate, and responsive quality have appeared on interview surveys on sensitive questions. This study, based on 4 focus group interviews with 31 interviewers who participated in the 2017 and 2021 IPV national interview surveys, explored challenges faced by interviewers during the interview survey on IPV questions and how they respond to these challenges. The results of this study have shown: 1. To be successful, contact with the respondents was critical for increasing the representativeness of the sample; 2. Reducing situational interference could increase the cooperation of the respondents and reduce the negative impact on the research quality; and 3. Clarifying the respondents' doubts about IPV questions and giving support could increase the cooperation of the respondents and enhance the research's effectiveness. Despite facing such challenges, interview survey is suitable for IPV research, compared with other surveys such as telephone survey or self-administered questionnaire survey. The respondents can even be empowered during the process of carrying out interview surveys. This study suggests that future research of the IPV or other sensitive issues and questions should strengthen the interviewer training and supervision during the data collection, and the use of computer-aided tools should be considered during interview surveys on sensitive questions.

1. 于若蓉, R.-R.,廖培珊, P.-S.(2021)。同居題項設計：家庭動態調查追蹤資料的研究。調查研究─方法與應用，47，7-43。
   連結：
2. 李政忠, C.-C.(2004)。網路調查所面臨的問題與解決建議。資訊社會研究，6，1-24。
   連結：
3. 杜素豪, S.-H.(2001)。問卷訪問中第三者在場的訪答效應。調查研究，9，73-102。
   連結：
4. 杜素豪, S.-H.(2004)。投票意向問題不同類型項目無反應之分析：以 2000 年總統大選為例。選舉研究，11(2)，111-131。
   連結：
5. 林啟耀, K.-Y.(2014)。訪員如何影響訪問績效？一個互動式的觀點。台灣政治學刊，18(1)，129-179。
   連結：
6. 許聰鑫, T.-S.,王延皊, Y.-L.,蘇完女, W.-N.,李麗日, L.-J.,王郁茗, Y.-M.(2004)。隨機反應法於敏感性資料之調查─模式檢驗與案例探討。中華心理衛生學刊，17(3)，1-22。
   連結：
7. 曾憲立, H.-L.,洪永泰, Y.-T.,朱斌妤, P.-Y.,黃東益, T.-Y.,謝翠娟, T.-C.(2018)。多元民意調查方法的比較研究。調查研究─方法與應用，41，87-117。
   連結：
8. 黃東益, T.-Y.,施佳良,C.-L.,謝忠安, C.-A.(2011)。台灣文官調查研究資料蒐集方法與調查品質：「訪員遞送與受訪者自填問卷」方法之探討。調查研究─方法與應用，25，141-179。
   連結：
9. 楊孟麗, M.-L.(2011)。訪問品質與訪問速度及完訪次序的關係。調查研究─方法與應用，25，47-89。
   連結：
10. Aquilino, W. S.,Wright, D. L.,Supple, A. J.(2000).Response effects due to bystander presence in CASI and paper-and-pencil surveys of drug use and alcohol use.Substance Use & Misuse,35(6-8),845-867.
11. Black, M. C.,Kresnow, M.-J.,Simon, T. R.,Arias, I.,Shelley, G.(2006).Telephone survey respondents’ reactions to questions regarding interpersonal violence.Violence and Victims,21(4),445-459.
12. de Leeuw, E. D.(Ed.),Hox, J. J.(Ed.),Dillman, D. A.(Ed.)(2008).International handbook of survey methodology.Routledge.
13. European Union(2014).Violence against women: An EU-wide survey. Main results report.European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights.
14. García-Moreno, C.,Jansen, H. A.,Ellsberg, M.,Heise, L.,Watts, C.(2005).WHO multi-country study on women’s health and domestic violence against women: Initial results on prevalence, health outcomes and women’s responses.World Health Organization.
15. Goldberg, N. G.,Meyer, I. H.(2012).Sexual orientation disparities in history of intimate partner violence: Results from the California Health Interview Survey.Journal of Interpersonal Violence,28(5),1109-1118.
16. Kim, J.,Dubowitz, H.,Hudson-Martin, E.,Lane, W.(2008).Comparison of 3 data collection methods for gathering sensitive and less sensitive information.Ambulatory Pediatrics,8(4),255-260.
17. Meyer, P. S.,Dahlhamer, J. M.,Pleis, J. R.(2006).Developing new methods and questions for improving response and measurement on sensitive questions on the National Health Interview Survey.Proceedings of the American Statistical Association
18. Myhill, A.(2015).Measuring coercive control: What can we learn from national population surveys?.Violence Against Women,21(3),355-375.
19. Tourangeau, R.,Yan, T.(2007).Sensitive question in survey.Psychological Bulletin,133(5),859-883.
20. United Nations(2014).Guidelines for producing statistics on Violence Against Women: Statistical Surveys.United Nations Publications.
21. Yoshihama, M.,Gillespie, B.,Hammock, A. C.,Belli, R. F.,Tolman, R. M.(2005).Does the life history calendar method facilitate the recall of intimate partner violence? Comparison of two methods of data collection.Social Work Research,29(3),151-163.
22. Yu, R. R.,Liu, Y. S.,Yang, M. L.(2014).Does interviewer personality matter for survey outcomes? Evidence from a face-to-face panel study of Taiwan.Survey Research-Method and Application,31,89-121.
23. 王麗容, L.-R.,陳芬苓, F.-L.(2003)。內政部委託研究報告內政部委託研究報告,未出版
24. 洪永泰, Y.-T(1996)。抽樣調查中樣本代表性的問題。調查研究，1，7-37。
25. 郭美貝, M.-P.(2012)。淡江大學=Tamkang University。
26. 鈕文英, W.-Y.(2021).質性研究方法與論文寫作.雙葉書廊=Yeh Yeh Book Gallery.
27. 潘淑滿Pan、 S.-M.,林東龍, D.-L.,林雅容, Y.-J.,陳杏容, H.-J.(2015)。衛生福利部委託研究計畫衛生福利部委託研究計畫,未出版
28. 龍文彬, W.-B.(1998)。以戶口及住宅普查資料檔為抽樣母體之實務應用與探討。調查研究，6，87-109。