Assessing the relative importance of recall bias and nonresponse bias and adjusting for those biases in statewide angler<i>surveys</i>

Connelly, Nancy A.; Brown, Tommy L.; Knuth, Barbara A.

doi:10.1080/10871200009359192

Cited by 62 publications

(52 citation statements)

References 9 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…We chose this program because it was purposefully designed to record catches of large fish and we believed that this program suffers little from problems typically associated with angler-supplied data. For example, a low response rate (<25%) from volunteer anglers is likely for angler-diary programs because recording every fish caught disrupts the angling trip (Connelly and Brown, 1996) and recall bias is a considerable problem for angler surveys (Connelly et al, 2000). In contrast, we believe most anglers take time to measure large fish when they are caught (i.e., no disruption to the angling trip) because it is an infrequent event.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Maximum size of fish caught with standard gears and recreational angling

2005

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We correlated maximum lengths of freshwater fishes captured during 10 years with standard gears (i.e., gill nets, boat electrofishers and trap nets) and angling from Nebraska water bodies to determine which methodology provided better estimates of maximum size of fishes produced within a given water body. In general, maximum length of fishes captured with standard gears was smaller than maximum length of fishes captured with angling. Although significant (based on sequential Bonferroni adjustment) correlation was found in only one of nine sport fishes assessed, all correlations were positive indicating a general trend between maximum size of fishes captured with these two methodologies. At present, one cannot reliably predict the maximum size of fishes that is likely to be caught with angling given the maximum size of fishes captured with standard gears during routine monitoring of a fishes population.

show abstract

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Maximum size of fish caught with standard gears and recreational angling

2005

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Many researchers have reported on recall and other survey biases [6][7][8]18]. This study had a 58.6% survey completion rate over 76 trips.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Powell et al [5] evaluated the health of discarded fish relative to the presumed 10% mortality rate [3]. Inaccuracy in angler recall and nonresponses to angler surveys can bias recreational catch and effort data [6][7][8][9][10][11]. Chase and Harada [12] noted that reducing the time between the event and the reporting of the event could possibly reduce the impact of recall bias.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Recall bias in recreational summer flounder party boat trips and angler preferences to new approaches to bag and size limits

2011

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Three innovative approaches to bag and size limits were evaluated in the recreational summer flounder Paralichthys dentatus fishery. Each approach was designed to reduce discard mortality while increasing angler satisfaction, yet still limiting recreational take within management goals. Each was compared to the 2006 legal bag and size limits on party boat trips from New Jersey and New York. Angler-specific catch data were collected during the trips, and anglers completed a questionnaire while sailing back to port. Comparison of questionnaires to observer records revealed that anglers could not accurately recall the number of fish kept or released. Anglers overestimated both kept and discarded fish by a factor of about two. Neither fishing scenario, age, sex, nor years fished significantly influenced the accuracy of survey reports of kept fish. Anglers on three of five boats over-reported landings. Reported landings were nearly accurate on two boats. Survey accuracy for reported discards was influenced by bag-and-size-limit scenario and differed among boats, sexes, and fishing experience, but no predictable pattern was evident. In particular, bias in reporting was unrelated to angler sex, age, experience, and performance on observed trips or any other criterion measured in this study. Anglers preferred the slot limit most and the 2006 legal bag and size limit least. High grading and transfer of fish among anglers were rare occurrences. Our study demonstrated that the summer flounder fishery is a consumptive fishery.

show abstract

“…Another potential bias in angler surveys is that anglers often overestimate their catch (Pitcher and Hollingworth 2002) and therefore the number of fish caught in Canada may have been overestimated using the above methods. For future applications, the level of angler overestimation can be quantified and a correction factor applied to the survey data (see Connelly and Brown 1995;Connelly et al 2000). An examination of Canadian angler survey data also identified some potential metrics of interest.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Full Issue PDF Volume 39, Issue 6

2014

Fisheries

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Assessing the relative importance of recall bias and nonresponse bias and adjusting for those biases in statewide anglersurveys

Cited by 62 publications

References 9 publications

Maximum size of fish caught with standard gears and recreational angling

Maximum size of fish caught with standard gears and recreational angling

Recall bias in recreational summer flounder party boat trips and angler preferences to new approaches to bag and size limits

Full Issue PDF Volume 39, Issue 6

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About