Abstract Privacy, achieved through self-administered modes of interviewing, has long been assumed to be a necessary prerequisite for obtaining unbiased responses to sexual identity questions due to their potentially sensitive nature. This study uses data collected as part of a split-ballot field test embedded in the National Health Interview Survey (NHIS) to examine the association between survey mode (computer-assisted personal interviewing (CAPI) versus audio computer-assisted self-interviewing (ACASI)) and sexual minority identity reporting. Bivariate and multivariate quantitative analyses tested for differences in sexual minority identity reporting and non-response by survey mode, as well as for moderation of such differences by sociodemographic characteristics and interviewing environment. No significant main effects of interview mode on sexual minority identity reporting or nonresponse were found. Two significant mode effects emerged in subgroup analyses of sexual minority status out of 35 comparisons, and one significant mode effect emerged in subgroup analyses of item nonresponse. We conclude that asking the NHIS sexual identity question using CAPI does not result in estimates that differ systematically and meaningfully from those produced using ACASI.

中文翻译：

---

在国家健康访问调查中询问性身份：模式重要吗？

摘要长期以来，通过自我管理的访谈方式实现的隐私由于其潜在的敏感性质，一直被认为是获得对性身份问题无偏见的必要先决条件。这项研究使用收集在国民健康访问调查（NHIS）中的选票拆分测试的一部分数据，来检查调查模式（计算机辅助个人访谈（CAPI）与音频计算机辅助自我访谈（ACASI）之间的关联））和少数族裔身份报告。双变量和多变量定量分析通过调查模式测试了少数族裔身份报告和未回答中的差异，并通过社会人口统计学特征和访谈环境来检验了这些差异。没有发现访谈模式对少数族裔身份报告或无反应的重大影响。在35个比较中，在少数群体性状态的子组分析中出现了两种显着的模式效应，在项目无反应的子组分析中出现了一种显着的模式效应。我们得出结论，使用CAPI询问NHIS性身份问题不会导致估算值与使用ACASI得出的估算值在系统上和意义上有所不同。