Strategies for Surveys of American Indians

Lavelle, Bridget; Larsen, Michael; Gundersen, Craig

doi:10.1093/poq/nfp026

Cited by 11 publications

(25 citation statements)

References 18 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…This growth is too large to be attributed to demographic factors alone (Lavelle et al, 2009;Passel, 1997). People may be motivated to identify with or to hide association with a particular cultural and linguistic group.…”

Section: Defining the Populationmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Without a list, identifying members of a minority population may require extensive screening of households to identify the population of interest. Traditional methods of sampling, such as address-based sampling (ABS) and random digit dialing (RDD), may be ineffective when listings are inaccurate or unavailable, and when the population is highly mobile (Lavelle et al, 2009). Traditional methods of sampling, such as address-based sampling (ABS) and random digit dialing (RDD), may be ineffective when listings are inaccurate or unavailable, and when the population is highly mobile (Lavelle et al, 2009).…”

Section: Developing the Sampling Framementioning

confidence: 99%

“…Traditional methods of sampling, such as address-based sampling (ABS) and random digit dialing (RDD), may be ineffective when listings are inaccurate or unavailable, and when the population is highly mobile (Lavelle et al, 2009). These sampling techniques allow researchers to recruit populations that are hard to identify and access, especially in contexts where cultural groups are distrustful or suspicious of outside researchers (e.g., Lavelle et al, 2009;Shoultz, Oneha, Magnussen, Hla, Brees-Saunders, Cruz et al, 2006). To overcome these challenges, other sampling techniques may be used, such as obtaining address lists from a service provider (e.g., Duffy, Goldberg, & Buchwald, 2006), using time-space sampling (e.g., Stueve et al, 2001), or snowball, chain-referral, and respondent-driven sampling (RDS) techniques (Faugier & Sargeant, 1997;Heckathorn, 2007; see also Part IV of this volume).…”

Section: Developing the Sampling Framementioning

confidence: 99%

“…This is particularly true of such US populations as Native Americans (Lavelle et al, 2009) and Latinos (Lindenberg, Solorzano, Vilaro, & Westbrook, 2001;O'Hegarty et al, 2010) and worldwide, asylum seekers and other displaced populations (Correa-Velez & Gifford, 2007). This is particularly true of such US populations as Native Americans (Lavelle et al, 2009) and Latinos (Lindenberg, Solorzano, Vilaro, & Westbrook, 2001;O'Hegarty et al, 2010) and worldwide, asylum seekers and other displaced populations (Correa-Velez & Gifford, 2007).…”

Section: Other Sampling Considerationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Surveying cultural and linguistic minorities

Harkness¹,

Stange²,

Cibelli³

et al. 2014

Hard-to-Survey Populations

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Cultural and linguistic minorities can be hard to survey either as the target population of interest or as a subpopulation of a general population survey. The challenges associated with studying these minorities are important to understand in order to assess and address the survey error that can be introduced when designing and implementing studies that include these groups. This chapter begins with a description of what constitutes cultural and linguistic minorities, based on a systematic review of the literature (see Chapter 5 in this volume, for a complete description of the process). We note that the literature in this area is largely limited to research among cultural and linguistic minorities in the context of Western and industrialized countries. Therefore, we supplement this literature by drawing upon our own experience and discussions with colleagues who conduct research among cultural and linguistic minorities in other parts of the world. This review is followed by a discussion of the potential challenges faced by researchers interested in surveying cultural and linguistic minorities and approaches taken to address these challenges in the areas of sampling, questionnaire development, adaptation and translation, pretesting, and data collection. We then discuss additional approaches to studying these hard-to-survey populations including qualitative, mixed-methods, and community-based research methods and how these can complement survey methods. The concluding section addresses needed improvements in the documentation and development of research methods to expand solutions and increase the quality of hard-to-survey cultural and linguistic minority research. Defining cultural and linguistic minoritiesThis section sets out the key features of cultural and linguistic minorities. Three core concepts are defined and discussed. First, we define minority populations followed by a discussion of linguistic and cultural minorities. The distinct concept of hard-to-survey is also relevant and discussed in this context (also see Chapter 1 in this volume). On the one hand, it is a relatively straightforward task to define these concepts; however, as we discuss below, applying these definitions in a survey context is far more complicated. Formal definitions serve as a good starting point for this discussion, however. 245https:/www.cambridge.org/core/terms. https://doi.

show abstract

Section: Defining the Populationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Developing the Sampling Framementioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Developing the Sampling Framementioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Other Sampling Considerationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Surveying cultural and linguistic minorities

Harkness¹,

Stange²,

Cibelli³

et al. 2014

Hard-to-Survey Populations

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…A recent lawsuit against Arizona State University, in which blood samples collected for diabetes research were used to draw conclusions about the Havasupai people without individual or tribal permission, illustrates how research with individuals might impact tribal communities (Sahota 2007). To prevent future harms, AI/AN/NH governments and affiliated organizations have organized to create policies and structures for regulating research, including guidance, suggestions for codes of research ethics, and resource kits for researchers and for AI/AN/NH communities (Committee on Native American Child Health and Committee on Community Health Services 2004; Lavelle, Larsen, and Gundersen 2009; Macaulay et al 1998; Mihesuah 1993; Quigley 2006; Sahota 2007 ; Santos 2008; Sharp and Foster 2002). Synthesis developed collaboratively with communities is a form of community-based research (Israel et al 1998) because it is a process that generates knowledge in partnership with communities.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Ethics and Community Involvement in Syntheses Concerning American Indian, Alaska Native, or Native Hawaiian Health: A Systematic Review

Gribble

Him

2014

AJOB Empirical Bioethics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background The objective of the research was to review reporting of ethical concerns and community involvement in peer-reviewed systematic reviews or meta-analyses concerning American Indian, Alaska Native, or Native Hawaiian (AI/AN/NH) health. Methods Text words and indexed vocabulary terms were used to query PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, and the Native Health Database for systematic reviews or meta-analyses concerning AI/AN/NH health published in peer-reviewed journals, followed by a search through reference lists. Each article was abstracted by two independent reviewers; results were discussed until consensus was reached. Results We identified 107 papers published from 1986–2012 that were primarily about AI/AN/NH health or presented findings separately for AI/AN/NH communities. Two reported seeking indigenous reviewer feedback; none reported seeking input from tribes and communities. Approximately 7% reported on institutional review board (IRB) approval of included studies, 5% reported on tribal approval, and 4% referenced the sovereignty of AI/AN tribes. Approximately 63% used evidence from more than one AI/AN/NH population study, and 28% discussed potential benefits to communities from the synthesis research. Conclusions Reporting of ethics and community involvement are not prominent. Systematic reviews and meta-analyses making community-level inferences may pose risks to communities. Future systematic reviews and meta-analyses should consider ethical and participatory dimensions of research.

show abstract

Identities and Intersectionality: A Case for Purposive Sampling in Survey‐Experimental Research

Klar

Leeper

2019

Experimental Methods in Survey Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Strategies for Surveys of American Indians

Cited by 11 publications

References 18 publications

Surveying cultural and linguistic minorities

Surveying cultural and linguistic minorities

Ethics and Community Involvement in Syntheses Concerning American Indian, Alaska Native, or Native Hawaiian Health: A Systematic Review

Identities and Intersectionality: A Case for Purposive Sampling in Survey‐Experimental Research

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About