Introduction

Some populations/groups are defined as hard to survey (H2S) in the research literature because of difficulty sampling the population, accessing the population, contacting members of the population, persuading them to participate, and interviewing group members (see Tourangeau, Chapter 1 in this volume). Reviewing the literature on populations referred to as “hard to survey” indicates the types of studies undertaken with these populations, the survey error challenges, and the methodological solutions used by researchers who study such populations. The H2S literature, however, does have limitations and research gaps exist.

The problems that complicate obtaining high-quality data from H2S populations are diverse and often interrelated. This review uses a quality assurance and quality control framework to discuss the total survey error associated with H2S studies. The discussion is based on an extensive systematic review of the quantitative and qualitative literature related to H2S, as well as our own experiences surveying these populations. (For a discussion and definition of kinds of H2S populations and the characteristics that earn them the H2S label, see Chapter 1 in this volume.)

Introduction and background

Worldwide, natural disasters have increased over 200 percent in the past decade, affecting over two billion people (Guha-Sapir, Vos, Below, & Ponserre, 2011). In 2010 alone, natural disasters affected more than 200 million people and cost more than $100 billion USD worldwide (Yonetani, 2011). The rise in natural disasters highlights the ever increasing demand to understand the physical, mental, social, and economic needs of these populations. Researchers who study this hard-to-survey population, often in regions of the world with already limited research infrastructure, face many challenges and have few methodological resources to guide their efforts. This chapter discusses the difficulties in designing and conducting research in areas affected by disasters, provides practical recommendations for conducting such research, and makes recommendations for future research and development.

Defining disasters

The Center for Research on the Epidemiology of Disasters (CRED) defines a disaster as meeting one of the four following criteria: (1) ten or more people reported killed; (2) 100 or more people affected; (3) declaration of a state of emergency; or (4) call for international assistance (www.emdat.be/criteria-and-definition). Areas of war and conflict are also covered under this broad definition. These latter topics are covered in Chapter 7 and will not be discussed here. CRED further classifies disasters into five distinct natural disasters groups: geophysical (e.g., earthquakes, volcano), meteorological (e.g., storm, blizzard), hydrological (e.g., flood, storm surge), climatological (e.g., extreme temperature, drought), and biological (e.g., epidemic). In addition to natural disasters, CRED includes technical disasters in its classification framework (e.g., industrial accidents, transportation accidents) and complex or multiple disasters such as the 2011 event in Japan (i.e., earthquake, tsunami, and nuclear accident).

Introduction

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 minorities

This 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.