Reasons for Interrupting Interviews in Panel Political Surveys
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.14515/monitoring.2026.1.3042Keywords:
telephone surveys, Russian-Ukrainian conflict, panel polls, cooperation of respondents, interruptions of interviewsAbstract
Response rate of different groups of respondents in mass political telephone surveys varies. Therefore, it is important to monitor the differences between respondents who are more willing to participate in the survey and all other respondents. In the course of the study, we compared the distribution of interrupted interviews and the reasons for interruptions among two samples of a mass telephone survey on the Russian-Ukrainian conflict: the first sample (A) was random, stratified by federal districts and representing the adult population of Russia (N = 1242 successful and 602 interrupted interviews, October 2024). The second sample (B) is made up of respondents who successfully completed a similar survey in June 2024 (N = 362 successful and 34 interrupted interviews). A database has been compiled from them, which has been rung at least 5 times each number or until the final status is reached. As a result, out of 1,603 previously successfully interviewed respondents, 362 people were successfully interviewed again, and 34 more interrupted the interview. A content analysis and qualitative analysis of audio recordings of interrupted interviews from both samples were conducted in order to measure and characterize differences in the reasons for interrupting interviews and their prevalence between Russians interviewed for the first time and those interviewed again (panel sample). At the listening stage, the sampling of audio recordings of interviews with respondents from sample A is spontaneous: 285 audio recordings from 602 interrupted interviews were listened to. From sample B, the audition interview sample is solid: all 34 interrupted interviews have been listened to. The results of the study. Repeated respondents interrupt interviews much less often (9% vs. 33% among first-time respondents) and interrupting interviews more often results from the accumulation of problems during the survey (53% vs. 40% in Sample A), however, the prevalence of reasons for interruptions is similar in both samples. Most often, an interview is interrupted by an unwillingness to discuss the topic of the survey, technical problems, and the respondent's employment. At the same time, despite the prevalence of interruptions due to unwillingness to discuss the topic of the survey, questions about the Russian-Ukrainian conflict cause more interruptions than other political topics.
References
Звоновский В.Б., Ходыкин А.В. Восприятие россиянами конфликта с Украиной: проверка гипотезы «спирали молчания» // Социологические исследования. 2023а. № 11. С. 38-50. https://doi.org/10.31857/S013216250028531-7.
Zvonovsky V.B., Khodykin A.V. (2023а) Russians' Perception of еhe Conflict with Ukraine: Testing the “Spiral of Silence” Hypothesis. Sociological Studies. No. 11. P. 38-50. https://doi.org/10.31857/S013216250028531-7. (In Russ.)
Звоновский В.Б., Ходыкин А.В. Стратегии адаптации сторонников и противников спецоперации к жизни в ее условиях (на примере жителей Самарской области) // Социологический журнал. 2023б. Т. 29. № 1. С. 8-35. https://doi.org/10.19181/socjour.2023.29.1.1.
Zvonovsky V.B., Khodykin A.V. (2023b) Strategies of Adaptation of Supporters and Opponents of the Special Operation to Life in Its Conditions (On the Example of Residents of the Samara Region). Sociological Journal. Vol. 29. No. 1. P. 8-35. https://doi.org/10.19181/socjour.2023.29.1.1. (In Russ.)
Звоновский В.Б., Ходыкин А.В. Российское общественное мнение в условиях военного конфликта 2022-2023. Chişinău: Historical Expertise, 2024.
Zvonovsky V.B., Khodykin A.V. (2024) Russian Public Opinion in the Context of Military Conflict 2022-2023. Chişinău: Historical Expertise. (In Russ.)
Звоновский В.Б., Ходыкин А.В., Блинова Е.В., Пятницкая Н.А. Проявления сенситивности темы российско-украинского конфликта в массовых телефонных опросах россиян: анализ аудиозаписей интервью // Вестник общественного мнения. 2024. № 1. С. 19-36.
Zvonovsky V.B., Khodykin A.V., Blinova E.V., Pyatnitskaya N.A. (2024) Manifestations of Sensitivity of the Topic of the Russian-Ukrainian Conflict in Mass Telephone Surveys of Russians: Analysis of Audio Recordings of Interviews. Bulletin of Public Opinion. No. 1. P. 19-36. (In Russ.)
Звоновский В.Б., Ходыкин А.В., Раскевич А.В. В свете опросов. Методические проблемы измерения общественного мнения о российско-украинском конфликте. Самара: Стандарт, 2026.
Zvonovsky V.B., Khodykin A.V., Raskevich A.V. (2026) In The Light of The Polls. Methodological Problems of Measuring Public Opinion on The Russian-Ukrainian Conflict. Samara: Standard, 2026. (In Russ.)
Ипатова А.А., Рогозин Д.М. Неправильные решения интервьюеров при коммуникативных сбоях в стандартизированном телефонном интервью // Телескоп. 2018. № 4. С. 21-34.
Ipatova A.A., Rogozin D.M. (2018) Incorrect Decisions of Interviewers in Case of Communication Failures in a Standardized Telephone Interview. Telescope. Vol. 130. No. 4. P. 21-34. (In Russ.)
Мануильская К.М. Инструменты для повышения эффективности автоматизированного телефонного опроса: на основе анализа прерванных интервью // Мониторинг общественного мнения: экономические и социальные перемены. 2014. № 6. С. 28—41. https://doi.org/10.14515/monitoring.2014.6.03.
Manuilskaya K.M. (2014) Tools for Improving the Effectiveness of Automated Telephone Polling: Based on the Analysis of Interrupted Interviews. Monitoring of Public Opinion: Economic and Social Changes. Vol. 124. No. 6. P. 28-41. https://doi.org/10.14515/monitoring.2014.6.03. (In Russ.)
Рогозин Д.М. В тени опросов, или Будни интервьюера. М.: Страна О3, 2017.
Rogozin D.M. (2017) In the Shadow of Polls, or the Everyday Life of an Interviewer. Moscow: Strana OZ. 1 (In Russ.)
Рогозин Д.М., Ипатова А.А., Галиева Н.И. Стандартизированное (телефонное) интервью. М.: Пункт, 2018.
Rogozin D.M., Ipatova A.A., Galieva N.I. (2018) Standardized (Telephone) Interview. Moscow: Punkt. (In Russ.)
Сапонов Д.И. Типы ошибок покрытия в телефонном опросе // Мониторинг общественного мнения: экономические и социальные перемены. 2015. № 4. С. 36-49. https://doi.org/10.14515/monitoring.2015.4.02.
Saponov D.I. (2015) Types of Coverage Errors in a Telephone Survey. Monitoring of Public Opinion: Economic and Social Changes. No. 4. P. 36-49. https://doi.org/10.14515/monitoring.2015.4.02. (In Russ.)
Broome J.S. (2012) Vocal Characteristics, Speech, and Behavior of Telephone Interviewers. Unpublished PhD Diss. Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan.
Broome J.S. (2014) How Telephone Interviewers’ Responsiveness Impacts Their Success. Field Methods. Vol. 27. No. 1. P. 66-81. https://doi.org/10.1177/1525822X14531477.
Charoenruk N., Olson K. (2018) Do Listeners Perceive Interviewers’ Attributes from their Voices and Do Perceptions Differ by Question Type? Field Methods. Vol. 30. No. 4. P. 312-328. https://doi.org/10.1177/1525822X18784500.
Conrad F.G. Broome J.S., Benki J.R., Kreuter F., Groves R.M., Vannette D., McClain C. (2013) Interviewer Speech and the Success of Survey Invitations. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series A: Statistics in Society. Vol. 176. No. 1. P. 191-210. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-985X.2012.01064.x
Dillman D.A., Smyth J.D., Christian L.M. (2014) Internet, Phone, Mail, and Mixed-Mode Surveys: The Tailored Design Method. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.
Frye T., Hale H., Reuter O. J., Rosenfeld B. (2024) Sensitivity Bias in Regime Support: Evidence from Panel Surveys in an Autocracy at War. URL: https://socialsciences.cornell.edu/sites/default/files/2024-10/sensitivity_bias_in_regime_support.pdf (date of access: 13.05.2025).
Groves R.M., Fowler F.J., Couper M.P., Lepkowski J.M., Singer E., Tourangeau R. (2009) Survey Methodology. Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press; John Wiley & Sons.
Holbrook A.L., Green M.C., Krosnick J.A. (2003) Telephone versus Face-to-Face Interviewing of National Probability Samples with Long Questionnaires: Comparisons of Respondent Satisficing and Social Desirability Response Bias. Public Opinion Quarterly. Vol. 67. No. 1. P. 79-125. https://doi.org/10.1086/346010.
Keeter S., Kennedy C., Dimock M., Best J., Craighill P. (2006) Gauging the Impact of Growing Nonresponse on Estimates from a National RDD Telephone Survey. Public Opinion Quarterly. Vol. 70. No. 5. P. 759-779. https://doi.org/10.1093/poq/nfl035.
Lasswell H.D. (1948) The Structure and Function of Communication in Society. In: The Communication of Ideas. New York, NY: Harper and Brothers. P. 37-51.
McGonagle K.A. (2013) Survey Breakoffs in a Computer-Assisted Telephone Interview. Survey Research Methods. Vol. 7. No. 2. P. 79-90.
Rogelberg S.G., Conway J.M., Sederburg M.E., Spitzmüller C., Aziz S., Knight W.E. (2003) Profiling Active and Passive Nonrespondents to an Organizational Survey. Journal of Applied Psychology. Vol. 88. No. 6. P. 1104-1114. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.88.6.1104.
Tkachenko A., Vyrskaia M. (2025) Public Opinion and Casualties in Wartime Censorship. SSRN. URL: https://ssrn.com/abstract=5160862 (date of access: 13.05.2025).
Tuckel P., O’Neill H. (2002) The Vanishing Respondent in Telephone Surveys. Journal of Advertising Research. Vol. 42. No. 5. P. 26-48. https://doi.org/10.2501/jar-42-5-26-48.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Владимир Борисович Звоновский, Александр Владимирович Ходыкин, Александра Владимировна Раскевич
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
