Proxy reports of others’ behaviors: when are they more accurate?

References

• AARP. (2020). AARP poll: 2020 healthy living during extraordinary times, Question 37 [31119428.00036]. NORC at the University of Chicago. Roper Center for Public Opinion Research. https://ropercenter.cornell.edu/
   Google Scholar
• Aiken, L. S., & West, S. G. (1991). Multiple regression: Testing and interpreting interactions. Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Alwin, D. (2007). Margins of error. John Wiley and Sons, Inc. https://doi.org/10.1002/9780470146316
   Google Scholar
• Avolio, B. J., Bass, B. M., & Jung, D. I. (1999). Re-examining the components of transformational and transactional leadership using the multifactor leadership questionnaire. Journal of Occupational & Organizational Psychology, 72(4), 441–462. https://doi.org/10.1348/096317999166789
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Axios. (2023). Axios-ipsos American health index wave 1, Question 68 [31120137.00067]. Ipsos. Roper Center for Public Opinion Research. https://ropercenter.cornell.edu/
   Google Scholar
• Beatty, P., Herrmann, D., Puskar, C., & Kerwin, J. (1998). Don’t know” responses in surveys: Is what I know what you want to know and do I want you to know it? Memory, 6(4), 407–426. https://doi.org/10.1080/741942605
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Berschfield, E., Snyder, M., & Omoto, A. M. (1989). The relationship closeness inventory: Assessing the closeness of interpersonal relationships. Journal of Personality & Social Psychology, 57(5), 792–807. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.57.5.792
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bickart, B. A., Phillips, J. M., & Blair, J. (2006). The effects of discussion and question wording on self and proxy reports of behavioral frequencies. Marketing Letters, 17(3), 167–180. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11002-006-5232-1
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bickart, B., & Felcher, E. M. (1996). Expanding and enhancing the use of verbal protocols in survey research. In N. Schwarz & S. Sudman (Eds.), Answering questions: Methodology for determining cognitive and communicative processes in survey research (pp. 115–142). Jossey-Bass.
   Google Scholar
• Blair, E., & Burton, S. (1987). Cognitive processes used by survey respondents to answer behavioral frequency questions. The Journal of Consumer Research, 14(2), 280–288. https://doi.org/10.1086/209112
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Blair, J., Menon, G., & Bickart, B. (1991). Measurement effects in self vs. proxy responses: An information-processing perspective. In P. P. Biemer, R. M. Groves, L. E. Lyberg, N. A. Mathiowetz, & S. Sudman (Eds.), Measurement errors in surveys (pp. 145–166). Wiley. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118150382.ch9
   Google Scholar
• Boehm, L. M. (1989). Reliability of proxy response in the current population survey. Proceedings of the Survey Research Methods Section, American Statistical Association (pp. 486–489). http://www.asasrms.org/Proceedings/index.html
   Google Scholar
• Bono, J. E., & Judge, T. A. (2003). Self-concordance at work: toward understanding the motivational effects of transformational leaders. Academy of Management Journal, 46(5), 554–571. https://doi.org/10.2307/30040649
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Borman, W. C. (1987). Personal constructs, performance schemata, and “folk theories” of subordinate effectiveness: Explorations in an army officer sample. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 40(3), 307–322. https://doi.org/10.1016/0749-5978(87)90018-5
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bradford, K. D., Crant, J. M., & Phillips, J. M. (2009). How suppliers affect trust with their customers: The role of salesperson job satisfaction and perceived customer importance. Journal of Marketing Theory & Practice, 17(4), 383–394. https://doi.org/10.2753/MTP1069-6679170406
   Google Scholar
• Burton, S., & Blair, E. (1991). Task conditions, response formulation processes, and response accuracy for behavioral frequency questions in surveys. Public Opinion Quarterly, 55(1), 50–79. https://doi.org/10.1086/269241
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• CBS News. (2005). CBS news poll: Price of Gasoline/John Robert’s supreme court Nomination/iraq, Question 13 [USCBS.090105.R17]. CBS News. Roper Center for Public Opinion Research. https://ropercenter.cornell.edu/
   Google Scholar
• Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS). (2021). Patient experience of Care survey (PECS) questionnaire file. https://pcfpecs.org/Portals/0/SurveyMaterials/PY2023/PCFEnglishQuestionnaire.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS). (2023). Primary care first: Patient experience of care (PEC) survey quality assurance guidelines for survey vendors PY 2023. Version 3 August 2023. https://pcfpecs.org/Portals/0/SurveyMaterials/PY2023/PY2023PECSQualityAssuranceGuidelinesApps.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Cobb, C. (2018a). Answering for someone else: Proxy reports in survey research. In D. Vannette & J. Krosnick (Eds.), The Palgrave handbook of survey research. Palgrave Macmillan. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-54395-6_12
   Google Scholar
• Cobb, C. (2018b). Proxy reporting. In D. Vannette & J. Krosnick (Eds.), The Palgrave handbook of survey Research. Palgrave Macmillan. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-54395-6_52
   Google Scholar
• Colvin, C. R., Vogt, D., & Ickes, W. (1997). Why do friends understand each other better than strangers do? In W. Ickes (Ed.), Empathic accuracy (pp. 169–193). Guilford Press.
   Google Scholar
• Conrad, F. G., Brown, N. R., & Cashman, E. R. (1998). Strategies for estimating behavioral frequency in survey interviews. Memory: Special Issue on Survey Research, 6(4), 339–366. https://doi.org/10.1080/741942603
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Consumer Reports. (2023). Consumer reports buy now pay later survey, Question 2 [31120568.00001]. SSRS. Roper Center for Public Opinion Research. https://ropercenter.cornell.edu/
   Google Scholar
• DeNisi, A. S., Cafferty, T. P., & Meglino, B. M. (1984). A cognitive model of the performance appraisal process: A model and research propositions. Organizational Behavior & Human Performance, 33(3), 360–396. https://doi.org/10.1016/0030-5073(84)90029-1
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• DeVoe, S. E., & Iyengar, S. S. (2004). Managers’ theories of subordinates: A cross-cultural examination of manager perceptions of motivation and appraisal of performance. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 93(1), 47–61. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.obhdp.2003.09.001
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Feldman, J. M. (1981). Beyond attribution theory: Cognitive processes in performance appraisal. Journal of Applied Psychology, 66(2), 127–148. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.66.2.127
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Feldman, J. M. (1994). On the synergy between theory and application: Social cognition and performance appraisal. In R. S. Wyer Jr. & T. K. Srull (Eds.), Handbook of social cognition, 2nd edition: Volume 2: Applications, psychology press (pp. 339–397). https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315807096
   Google Scholar
• Feldman, J. M., & Lynch, J. G., Jr. (1988). Self-generated validity and other effects of measurement on belief, attitude, intention, and behavior. Journal of Applied Psychology, 73(3), 421–435. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.73.3.421
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fulton, J., Katz, J., Luck, J., Henderson, A., & Davis, M. (2020). Is a proxy response good enough? Using paired cognitive interviews to assess the accuracy of proxy responses. Research and methodology directorate, center for behavioral science methods research report series (survey methodology #2020-06). U.S. Census Bureau. http://www.census.gov/content/dam/Census/library/working-papers/2020/adrm/rsm2020-06.pdf
   Google Scholar
• George Mason University Center for Climate Change Communication/Yale University Project on Climate Change Communication. (2023). Yale University/George Mason University climate change in the American Mind survey, Question 67 [31120675.00067]. Ipsos. Roper Center for Public Opinion Research. https://ropercenter.cornell.edu/
   Google Scholar
• Heslin, P. A., Lanthan, G. P., & VandeWalle, D. (2005). The effect of implicit person theory on performance appraisals. Journal of Applied Psychology, 90(5), 842–856. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.90.5.842
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ipsos. (2021). Ipsos understanding society: Wave 16 August 2021, Question 20 [31118600.00019]. Ipsos. Roper Center for Public Opinion Research. https://ropercenter.cornell.edu/
   Google Scholar
• Kaiser Family Foundation, H. J. (2021). Kaiser family foundation poll: April 2021 Kaiser health tracking poll/COVID-19 vaccine monitor, Question 23 [31118402.00022]. SSRS. Roper Center for Public Opinion Research. https://ropercenter.cornell.edu/
   Google Scholar
• Katz, J., Luck, J., & Fulton, J. (2022). Lessons learned from conducting paired cognitive interview studies to examine the feasibility of proxy reporting. Survey Practice, 15(1), 1–9. https://doi.org/10.29115/SP-2022-0001
   Google Scholar
• Kelley, H. H., Berscheid, E., Christensen, A., Harvey, J. H., Huston, T. L., & Levinger, G. (1983). Close relationships. Freeman.
   Google Scholar
• Kojetin, B. A., & Jerstad, S. (1997). The quality of proxy reports on the consumer expenditure survey. Paper presented at the Society for Consumer Psychology Conference, St Petersburg, Florida.
   Google Scholar
• Kojetin, B. A., & Miller, L. A. (1993). The intrahousehold communications study: Estimating the accuracy of proxy responses at the dyadic level. Proceedings of the Survey Research Methods Section, American Statistical Association (pp. 1095–1100). http://www.asasrms.org/Proceedings/index.htm
   Google Scholar
• Krosnick, J. A. (2018). Improving question design to maximize reliability and validity. In Vannette, D. & Krosnick, J. (Eds.), The Palgrave handbook of survey research. Palgrave Macmillan. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-54395-6_13
   Google Scholar
• Krosnick, J. A., Presser, S., Fealing, K. H., & Ruggles, S. (2015). The future of survey research: Challenges and opportunities. The national science foundation advisory committee for the social, behavioral and economic sciences subcommittee on advancing SBE survey research. http://www.nsf.gov/sbe/AC_Materials/The_Future_of_Survey_Research.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Larsen, S. F. (1988). Remembering without experiencing: Memory for reported events. In U. Neisser & E. Winograd (Eds.), Remembering reconsidered: Ecological and traditional approaches to the study of memory (pp. 326–355). Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511664014.014
   Google Scholar
• Lelkes, Y., Krosnick, J. A., Marx, D. M., Judd, C. M., & Park, B. (2012). Complete anonymity compromises the accuracy of self-reports. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 48(6), 1291–1299. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2012.07.002
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mathiowetz, N. (2010). Self and proxy reporting in the consumer expenditure survey program. Commissioned paper for the Council of Professional Associations on Federal Statistics, Consumer Expenditure Survey Methods Workshop, Washington, DC. 2010. https://www.bls.gov/cex/methwrkshp_pap_mathiowetz.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Means, B., & Loftus, E. (1991). When personal history repeats itself: Decomposing memories for recurring events. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 5(4), 297–318. https://doi.org/10.1002/acp.2350050402
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Menon, G. (1993). The effects of accessibility of information in memory on judgments of behavioral frequencies. The Journal of Consumer Research, 20(3), 431–440. https://psycnet.apa.org/doi/10.1086/209359
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Menon, G. (1997). Are the parts better than the whole? The effects of decompositional questions on judgments of frequent behaviors. Journal of Marketing Research, 32(3), 335–346. https://doi.org/10.2307/3151896
   Google Scholar
• Menon, G., Bickart, B., Sudman, S., & Blair, J. (1995a). How well do you know your partner? Strategies for formulating proxy-reports and their effects on the convergence to self-reports. Journal of Marketing Research, 32(1), 75–84. https://psycnet.apa.org/doi/10.2307/3152112
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Menon, G., Raghubir, P., & Schwarz, N. (1995b). Behavioral frequency judgments: An accessibility-diagnosticity framework. The Journal of Consumer Research, 22(2), 212–228. https://psycnet.apa.org/doi/10.1086/209446
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mingay, D. J., Shevell, S. K., Bradburn, N. M., & Ramirez, C. (1994). Self and proxy reports of everyday events. In N. Schwarz & S. Sudman (Eds.), Autobiographical memory and validity of retrospective reports (pp. 225–250). Springer-Verlag. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4612-2624-6_16
   Google Scholar
• Phillips, J. M. (2021). Using examples to increase recall in self-administered questionnaires. International Journal of Market Research, 63(6), 738–753. https://doi.org/10.1177/14707853211052177
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Posner, B. Z., & Kouzes, J. M. (1993). Psychometric properties of the leadership practices inventory-updated. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 53(1), 191–199. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013164493053001021
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Preacher, K. J., Curran, P. J., & Bauer, D. J. (2006). Computational tools for probing interactions in multiple linear regression, multilevel modeling, and latent curve analysis. Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics, 31(4), 437–448. https://doi.org/10.3102/10769986031004437
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Presser, S., Couper, M. P., Lessler, J. T., Martin, E., Martin, J., Rothgeb, J. M., Singer, E., Groves, R. M., Kalton, G., Rao, J. N. K., Schwarz, N., Skinner, C., Presser, S., Rothgeb, J. M., Couper, M. P., Lessler, J. T., Martin, E., & Singer), E. (2004). Methods for testing and evaluating survey questions. In J. Martin (Ed.), Methods for testing and evaluating survey questionnaires. https://doi.org/10.1002/0471654728.ch1
   Google Scholar
• Quinnipiac University Polling Institute. (2024). Quinnipiac University poll, Question 32 [31120947.00031]. Quinnipiac University Polling Institute. Roper Center for Public Opinion Research. https://ropercenter.cornell.edu/
   Google Scholar
• Roper Center for Public Opinion Research. (RCPOR). (2024). iPoll. Cornell University. https://ropercenter.cornell.edu/
   Google Scholar
• Rubin, D. C. (2022). A conceptual space for episodic and semantic memory. Memory & Cognition, 50(3), 464–477. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13421-021-01148-3
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ruel, E., Wagner, W., & Gillespie, B. (2016). Pretesting and pilot testing. In The practice of survey research: Theory and applications (pp. 101–119). SAGE Publications, Inc. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781483391700
   Google Scholar
• Schwarz, N. (2019). Surveys, experiments, and the psychology of self-report. In F. Kardes, P. Herr, & N. Schwarz (Eds.), Handbook of research methods in consumer psychology (pp. 17–40). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781351137713
   Google Scholar
• Schwarz, N., & Wellens, T. (1997). Cognitive dynamics of proxy responding: The diverging perspectives of actors and observers. Journal of Official Statistics, 13, 159–179.
   Google Scholar
• Shoemaker, M. E. (2003). Leadership behaviors in sales managers: A level analysis. Journal of Marketing Theory & Practice, 11(2), 17. https://doi.org/10.1080/10696679.2003.11658493
   Google Scholar
• Skowronski, J. J., Betz, A. L., Thompson, C. P., & Shannon, L. (1991). Social memory in everyday life: Recall of self-events and other-events. Journal of Personality & Social Psychology, 60(6), 831–843. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.60.6.831
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stark, T. H., & Stocké, V. (2021). Predicting data quality of proxy reports in egocentric network studies. Social Networks, 66, 38–49. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.socnet.2021.01.007
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Strube, G. (1987). Answering survey questions: The role of memory. In H. J. Hippler, N. Schwarz, & S. Sudman (Eds.), Social information processing and survey Methodology. Recent research in psychology. Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4612-4798-2_5
   Google Scholar
• Sudman, S., Bickart, B., Blair, B., & Menon, G. (1994). A comparison of self and proxy-reporting. In N. Schwarz & S. Sudman (Eds.), Autobiographical memory and the validity of retrospective reports (pp. 251–266). Springer-Verlag. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4612-2624-6_17
   Google Scholar
• Sudman, S., Bradburn, N. M., & Schwarz, N. (1996). Thinking about answers: the application of cognitive processes to survey methodology. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
   Google Scholar
• Todorov, A. (2003). Cognitive procedures for correcting proxy-response biases in surveys. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 17(2), 215–224. https://doi.org/10.1002/acp.850
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tourangeau, R., Rips, L. J., & Rasinski, K. (2000). The psychology of survey response. Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511819322
   Google Scholar
• U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics (USBLS). (2024). Consumer expenditure survey interview questionnaire (CEQ) – April 2024 – March 2025 computer assisted personal interviewing (CAPI) – instrument specifications. April. 2024. https://www.bls.gov/cex/research_papers/pdf/2024-2025-ceqquestionnaire.pdf
   Google Scholar
• U.S. Census Bureau (USCB). (2023a). 2022 Survey of income and program participation (SIPP) public use instrument specification, June 2023. https://www2.census.gov/programs-surveys/sipp/tech-documentation/2022/2022_SIPP_PU_Instrument_Specifications.pdf
   Google Scholar
• U.S. Census Bureau (USCB). (2023b). 2022 survey of income and program participation users’ Guide, June 2023, Reissued September 2023. https://www2.census.gov/programs-/sipp/tech-documentation/methodology/2022_SIPP_Users_Guide_SEP23.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Zuckerbraun, S., Allen, R. W., & Flanigan, T. (2020). Paired interviews to evaluate patient and proxy responses on patient experience of care surveys (PECS). Field Methods, 32(1), 105–126. https://doi.org/10.1177/1525822X19888612
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar