Hubbry Logo
Computer-assisted personal interviewingComputer-assisted personal interviewingMain
Open search
Computer-assisted personal interviewing
Community hub
Computer-assisted personal interviewing
logo
7 pages, 0 posts
0 subscribers
Be the first to start a discussion here.
Be the first to start a discussion here.
Contribute something
Computer-assisted personal interviewing
Computer-assisted personal interviewing
Computer-assisted personal interviewing
View on Wikipedia
from Wikipedia

Computer-assisted personal interviewing (CAPI) is an interviewing technique in which the respondent or interviewer uses an electronic device to answer the questions. It is similar to computer-assisted telephone interviewing, except that the interview takes place in person instead of over the telephone. This method is usually preferred over a telephone interview when the questionnaire is long and complex. It has been classified as a personal interviewing technique because an interviewer is usually present to serve as a host and to guide the respondent. If no interviewer is present, the term Computer-Assisted Self Interviewing (CASI) may be used. An example of a situation in which CAPI is used as the method of data collection is the British Crime Survey.

Characteristics of this interviewing technique are:

  • Either the respondent or an interviewer operates a device (this could be a laptop, a tablet or a smartphone) and answers a questionnaire.
  • The questionnaire is an application that takes the respondent through a set of questions using a pre-designed route based on answers given by the respondent.
  • Help screens and courteous error messages are provided.
  • Colorful screens and on and off-screen stimuli can add to the respondent's interest and involvement in the task.
  • This approach is used in shopping malls, preceded by the intercept and screening process.
  • CAPI is also used to interview households, using sampling techniques like random walk to get a fair representation of the area that needs to be interviewed.
  • It is also used to conduct business-to-business research at trade shows or conventions.

Advantages CAPI

[edit]
  • The face-to-face setting allows the interviewer to capture verbal and non-verbal feedback.
  • Personal interviewing allows for interviews of longer duration. Interviews of 45 minutes or more are not uncommon.
  • Modern devices can record audio feedback from respondent, track GPS location and allows pictures to be taken of the interview, thus adding to the quality of the data.
  • There is no need to transcribe the results into a computer form. The computer program can be constructed so as to place the results directly in a format that can be read by statistical analysis programs such as PSPP or DAP.
  • The presence of an interviewer helps when probing for spontaneous awareness of certain topics.
  • The interviewer can verify that the respondent answering the questions is the person that needs to be interviewed.

Disadvantages CAPI

[edit]
  • It is a relatively expensive means of interviewing.
  • In comparison to web interviewing it can be more time consuming to gather data.

Computer-Assisted Self Interviewing (CASI)

[edit]

The big difference between a computer-assisted self interview (CASI) and a computer-assisted personal interview (CAPI) is that in the latter an interviewer is present, but not in the former. There are two kinds of computer-assisted self interviewing: a "video-CASI" and an "audio-CASI". Both types of computer-assisted self interviewing might have a big advantage over computer-assisted personal interviewing, because subjects could be more inclined to answer sensitive questions. The reason for this is that they feel that a CASI is more private due to the absence of an interviewer.

Advantages CASI

[edit]

This form of interview is substantially cheaper when a large number of respondents is required, because:

  • There is no need to recruit or pay interviewers. Respondents are able to fill in the questionnaires themselves.
  • The program can be placed on a web site, potentially attracting a worldwide audience.
  • Another advantage is that there is more likely hood of getting true and honest responses from the subjects in very sensitive matters.

Disadvantages CASI

[edit]
  • The survey is likely to attract only respondents who are "computer savvy", thus introducing potential bias to the survey.
  • The survey can miss feedback and clarification/quality control that a personal interviewer could provide. For example, a question that should be interpreted in a particular way, but could also be interpreted differently, can raise questions for respondents. If no interviewer is present, these questions will not be answered, potentially causing bias in the results of the questionnaire.

Video-CASI

[edit]

Video-CASI are often used to make a complex questionnaire more understandable for the person that is being interviewed. With video-CASI, respondents read questions as they appear on the screen and enter their answers with the keyboard (or some other input device). The computer takes care of the "housekeeping" or administrative tasks for the respondent. The advantages of video-CASI are automated control of complex question routing, the ability to tailor questions based on previous responses, real-time control of out-of-range and inconsistent responses, and the general standardization of the interview.[1]

Video-CASI possesses significant disadvantages, however. Most obviously, video-CASI demands that the respondent can read with some facility. A second, more subtle disadvantage is that, at least with the character-based displays of many video-CASI applications of today, the visual and reading burden imposed on the respondent appears to be much greater than with an attractively designed paper form. The size of the characters and other qualities of the computer user interface seem to demand more reading and computer screen experience than that possessed by many who might be competent readers of printed material. Graphical user interfaces (GUI) may reduce or eliminate this problem, but the present software used to developed video-CASI applications usually lacks this feature.

Audio-CASI

[edit]

Audio-CASI (sometimes called Telephone-CASI) asks respondents questions in an auditory fashion. Audio-CASI has the same advantage as Video-CASI in that it can make a complex questionnaire more understandable for the person that is being interviewed. It provides privacy (or anonymity) of response equivalent to that of paper self-administered questionnaires (SAQs). In contrast to Video-CASI, Audio-CASI proffers these potential advantages without limiting data collection to the literate segment of the population.[2]

By adding simultaneous audio renditions of each question and instruction aloud, audio-CASI can remove the literacy barriers to self-administration of either Video-CASI or SAQ. In audio-CASI, an audio box is attached to the computer; respondents put on headphones and listen to the question and answer choices as they are displayed on the screen. Respondents have the option of turning off the screen so that people coming into the room cannot read the questions, turning off the sound if they can read faster than the questions are spoken, or keeping both the sound and video on as they answer the questions. Respondents can enter a response at any time and move to the next question without waiting for completion of the audio question and answer choices for a question.

The advantages of audio-CASI, then, are that the addition of audio makes CASI fully applicable to a very wide range of respondents. Persons with limited or no reading abilities are able to listen, understand, and respond to the full content of the survey instrument. Observers of audio-CASI interviews also often report that even with seemingly strong readers, audio-CASI interviews seem to more effectively and fully capture respondents’ concentration. This may be because wearing headphones increases the insulation of the respondent for external stimuli, and also may be explained by the fact that the recorded human voice in the audio component evokes a more personalized interaction between the respondent and the instrument.[1]

Research on computer-assisted interviewing

[edit]

Computer-assisted interviewing methods such as CAPI, CATI, or CASI, have been the focus of systematic reviews on the effects of computer-assisted interviewing on data quality. Those reviews indicate that computer-assisted methods are accepted by both interviewers and respondents, and these methods tend to improve data quality.[3][4] [5] Waterton and Duffy (1984) compared reports of alcohol consumption under CASI and personal interviews. Overall, reports of alcohol consumption were 30 percent higher under the CASI procedure, and reports of liquor consumption were 58 percent higher.[6]

In a study that compared Audio-CASI with paper SAQs and Video-CASI, researchers showed that both Audio- and Video-CASI systems work well even with subjects who do not have extensive familiarity with computers. Indeed, respondents preferred the Audio- and Video-CASI to paper SAQs. The computerized systems also eliminated errors in execution of “skip” instructions that occurred when subjects completed paper SAQs. In a number of instances, the computerized systems also appeared to encourage more complete reporting of sensitive behaviors such as use of illicit drugs. Among the two CASI systems, respondents rated Audio-CASI more favorably than Video-CASI in terms of interest, ease of use, and overall preference.[2]

See also

[edit]

References

[edit]
Revisions and contributorsEdit on WikipediaRead on Wikipedia

Computer-assisted personal interviewing

View on Grokipedia
from Grokipedia
Computer-assisted personal interviewing (CAPI) is a face-to-face survey data collection technique in which an interviewer uses a , tablet, , or similar electronic device to administer a structured and enter responses directly into a digital system during the interview. This method combines the interpersonal interaction of traditional in-person interviewing with computer to handle complex question routing, , and real-time error checking. The development of CAPI emerged in the mid-1980s, enabled by advances in portable computing technology such as computers, which made field-based electronic feasible for the first time. Early experiments occurred before this period, but operational viability arrived with the revolution, allowing surveys to shift from paper-and-pencil methods. The first national CAPI survey was conducted in the in 1987, marking a significant milestone in its adoption by government statistical offices. In the United States, an early experimental occurred in 1989 with approximately 300 cases in ’s National Longitudinal Survey of Youth (NLSY79) Round 11. By the 1990s, CAPI had become the preferred approach for large-scale face-to-face surveys worldwide, driven by demands for improved , timeliness, and cost efficiency in organizations and statistical agencies. CAPI offers several key advantages over traditional methods, including automated skip patterns and logic checks that reduce interviewer errors and ensure consistent data flow, as well as built-in validations to flag inconsistencies during the interview process. It facilitates real-time monitoring of field staff through features like GPS tracking, start/end timestamps, and immediate data uploads via or mobile networks, enabling high-frequency quality checks and faster processing. These capabilities make CAPI particularly suitable for complex, longitudinal, or large-scale surveys in fields such as demographics, , and . However, it also presents challenges, such as higher upfront costs for hardware and software training, vulnerability to device theft or damage in high-risk areas, and dependency on and connectivity, which can hinder use in remote or low-resource settings. Additionally, while effective for quantitative data, CAPI may raise respondent concerns due to the visible device and is less adaptable for open-ended qualitative inquiries.

Overview

Definition and principles

Computer-assisted personal interviewing (CAPI) is a face-to-face method in which an interviewer uses a portable electronic device, such as a tablet, , , or (PDA), to administer survey questions and record respondent answers in real-time. This approach replaces traditional paper-and-pencil interviewing (PAPI) by leveraging software to display questions on the device screen, allowing the interviewer to read them aloud while entering responses directly into the system. CAPI is commonly employed in household surveys and censuses, often as part of mixed-mode strategies where it serves as a follow-up to self-response methods. The core principles of CAPI center on enhancing data quality, efficiency, and timeliness through automated software features that guide the interview process. Key elements include branching logic, which implements skip patterns and routing based on prior responses to ensure only relevant questions are asked, thereby streamlining the flow and reducing respondent burden. Real-time data validation is another fundamental principle, incorporating range checks (e.g., ensuring age entries fall within logical bounds) and consistency checks (e.g., verifying that reported employment aligns with income data) to flag errors immediately for correction during the interview. Additionally, CAPI supports integration of multimedia elements, such as images for product identification, audio prompts for complex instructions, or even video and GPS for contextual aids, which improve question comprehension without interrupting the interpersonal dynamic. These features operate in both online (real-time transmission via cellular or Wi-Fi) and offline modes, with data synchronization to central servers to facilitate supervision and analysis. A defining aspect of CAPI is the presence of a trained interviewer who actively guides the process, distinguishing it from fully self-administered methods like computer-assisted self-interviewing (CASI), where respondents interact directly with the device without guidance. The interviewer builds rapport through verbal and nonverbal cues to foster trust and encourage disclosure, particularly for sensitive topics, which has been shown to increase disclosure of highly sensitive information by 11.5% compared to low-sensitivity questions in high-rapport interactions. Meanwhile, the device manages data entry and validation to minimize recording errors, allowing the interviewer to focus on engagement and clarification rather than manual notation. This division of labor—human rapport-building paired with technological precision—underpins CAPI's effectiveness in achieving high-quality data in personal interview settings.

History

The origins of computer-assisted personal interviewing (CAPI) trace back to the broader emergence of computer-assisted interviewing (CAI) methods in the , when mainframe computers were initially used for survey simulations and in settings. However, practical for field-based personal interviews remained limited due to the lack of portable hardware, with operational feasibility only achieved in the mid- following the introduction of lightweight laptop computers that enabled interviewers to conduct face-to-face surveys without paper questionnaires. Early experiments in government surveys, such as those by the , began incorporating CAPI elements in the early to replace traditional paper methods. By the late 1980s, major survey organizations in the United States and , including entities like the U.S. Census Bureau and polling firms, established CAPI capabilities as portable computing became more reliable. The first national CAPI survey was the Netherlands Labour Force Survey in 1987. In the , an early large-scale implementation occurred in 1989 with Ohio State University’s National Longitudinal Survey of Youth (NLSY79) Round 11. Widespread adoption accelerated in the early with large-scale implementations using early laptops, supported by software advancements like Blaise, developed in the 1980s by to handle complex branching logic and real-time data validation without paper aids. These developments were driven by improvements in power, including longer battery life and larger screen sizes, which made fieldwork more efficient. The transition to tablets and mobile applications gained momentum in the 2000s and 2010s, fueled by cheaper hardware and versatile software platforms that further reduced costs and enhanced portability. Globally, CAPI spread from early use in U.S. and European national surveys—such as the German Socio-Economic Panel (SOEP), which switched to CAPI for its 1998 refreshment sample to improve and reduce routing errors—to broader adoption in developing countries during the 2010s, where enabled large-scale surveys in resource-limited settings, as seen in randomized experiments in using handheld devices.

Implementation

Process and technology

The process of computer-assisted personal interviewing (CAPI) begins with preparation, where survey designers use specialized software to author questionnaires incorporating logic checks, skip patterns, and validation rules. This questionnaire is then uploaded to portable devices, such as tablets or smartphones, ensuring compatibility with the chosen platform before deployment to field teams. During fieldwork, interviewers conduct face-to-face interviews by reading questions displayed on the device's screen and entering respondent answers in real time, with the software automatically skipping irrelevant sections based on prior responses to streamline the flow. Post-interview, collected data is uploaded or synchronized to a central server, where automated cleaning processes address any residual inconsistencies, enabling rapid aggregation for analysis. Key technology components in CAPI include hardware like rugged tablets or smartphones equipped with touchscreens, GPS for location verification, and sufficient battery capacity for extended field use, typically running Android operating systems with at least 2 GB RAM and 32 GB storage as of 2025. Software platforms, such as CSPro, Open Data Kit (ODK), or Survey Solutions, facilitate questionnaire authoring, support offline data capture in remote areas, and incorporate to secure sensitive during transmission. These systems often integrate elements, like images or audio prompts, and enable real-time connectivity when available to sync partial data uploads, with modern implementations supporting for faster transmission. Data management in CAPI emphasizes quality through features like real-time error flagging, where the software prompts interviewers to correct invalid entries—such as an age value exceeding 150—before proceeding. Automatic timestamping records the start and end times of responses, while GPS metadata verifies interview locations, aiding in longitudinal studies by linking data to databases for tracking changes over time. This approach minimizes post-collection editing, with built-in validations significantly reducing rates compared to traditional methods. Despite these advances, CAPI faces technical challenges, including battery management, as devices may last only 8-10 hours of active use, necessitating power banks or spares for prolonged fieldwork. Software glitches, such as occasional data corruption during offline syncing or GPS inaccuracies within 10-15 meters, can disrupt operations, requiring regular backups and robust testing protocols to mitigate risks.

Training and equipment

Interviewer for computer-assisted personal interviewing (CAPI) typically follows a structured curriculum designed to equip fieldworkers with the necessary skills for effective . The General Interviewer for CAPI (GIT-CAPI) provides a modular framework consisting of seven core modules, covering topics such as survey administration, interviewing techniques, , and technical proficiency, with a minimum duration of 26 hours spread over 1-2 weeks for new users. This training emphasizes device navigation and troubleshooting common issues like screen freezing through dedicated technical tutorials, while ethical data handling is addressed via modules on privacy laws and professional standards. Participants practice branching logic—where questions adapt based on prior responses—during sessions on survey instruments, and scenarios simulate real-world interactions to build communication skills and refusal avoidance strategies. Equipment selection for CAPI prioritizes durability and functionality suited to fieldwork environments. Devices such as rugged tablets are preferred for their resistance to drops, dust, and extreme temperatures, ensuring reliability during mobile data collection. Compatibility with operating systems like Android, iOS, or Windows is essential, along with features including strong battery life, sufficient memory, GPS for location tracking, and cameras for multimedia elements. Software options range from custom-developed tools tailored to specific surveys to open-source platforms like Survey Solutions, with licensing costs varying based on scale and features—proprietary systems often incur annual fees, while open-source alternatives reduce upfront expenses. Logistics for CAPI deployment involve careful planning to support seamless operations. Devices are distributed pre-loaded with questionnaires and necessary software to minimize on-site setup, often centralized through project coordinators for tracking and assignment to interviewers. Maintenance protocols include establishing charging stations at field bases, regular antivirus updates to protect data integrity, and routine checks for hardware wear, ensuring devices remain operational throughout extended surveys. Initial setup costs per device typically range from $500 to $2,000, encompassing rugged hardware acquisition, software installation, and accessories like protective cases. Best practices for CAPI emphasize pilot testing to validate equipment under real field conditions, simulating diverse scenarios such as varying connectivity and weather to identify issues like battery drain or software glitches before full rollout. This testing phase, often integrated with initial , confirms device reliability and interviewer preparedness, reducing errors in production surveys.

Variants

Computer-assisted self-interviewing (CASI)

Computer-assisted self-interviewing (CASI) is a privacy-focused variant of computer-assisted personal interviewing in which respondents directly enter their answers using a computer's or keyboard, while an interviewer remains present but averts their gaze from the screen to maintain . This approach emerged in the as a means to mitigate in face-to-face surveys, particularly for sensitive subjects where respondents might otherwise underreport or alter responses due to perceived judgment. Operationally, CASI differs from standard interviewer-led entry by employing software that conceals responses in a private mode, preventing the interviewer from seeing inputs in real time, and incorporates user-friendly elements such as on-screen progress indicators and contextual help text to guide respondents independently. The interviewer typically manages non-sensitive sections via direct computer-assisted personal interviewing (CAPI), transitioning seamlessly to CASI for confidential portions, which allows for a hybrid structure within a single session. This setup is commonly applied to topics like behaviors, income levels, or personal experiences that benefit from enhanced . In implementation, is physically handed to the respondent and often reoriented—such as turned toward them or placed on their lap—to further shield the screen from view, ensuring the interviewer provides only logistical support without influencing answers. occurs in real time, with responses immediately synced to a central server for secure storage and analysis, maintaining the integrity of the overall survey flow while integrating self-administered segments. This method supports complex routing and validation checks directly on the device, reducing errors common in unsupervised self-administration.

Audio-CASI

Audio computer-assisted self-interviewing (ACASI) extends the principles of computer-assisted self-interviewing (CASI) by incorporating pre-recorded audio playback of survey questions delivered through , enabling respondents to listen privately while viewing text on a screen and entering responses independently via touch, keyboard, or other interfaces. This method is particularly suited for illiterate, semi-literate, or visually impaired participants, as the audio eliminates reliance on reading while maintaining respondent control over pacing and privacy. Unlike interviewer-led approaches, ACASI minimizes on sensitive topics by allowing self-administration without direct observation. The technical setup of ACASI involves integrating audio components into survey software platforms such as Blaise or QDS, where questions can use either custom pre-recorded voice files in multiple languages or text-to-speech synthesis for efficiency. are provided to ensure auditory privacy, and responses are captured through user-friendly options like interfaces, keypads, or, in advanced implementations, limited for accessibility. Development requires careful audio production to handle pronunciation, background noise reduction, and file optimization (e.g., converting to SWA formats for smaller sizes), often coordinated via cloud tools like in field settings. This setup supports complex logic such as skip patterns and eligibility checks, making it adaptable for modular questionnaires. ACASI gained traction in the early alongside advancements in portable and audio , evolving from high-income applications to broader use in low- and middle-income contexts for health-related surveys on topics like risk, mental health, and substance use. It has been employed in studies such as the U.S. National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES) for sensitive behavioral data collection and in Zambian research on orphans and vulnerable children, where modules typically last 10-20 minutes to balance depth with respondent burden. These implementations highlight ACASI's role in improving reporting accuracy and accessibility in assessments.

Video-CASI

Video-CASI, or Video Computer-Assisted Self-Interviewing (also known as VCASI or AVCASI), represents an extension of computer-assisted self-interviewing (CASI) that incorporates prerecorded video clips to deliver questions, demonstrations, or scenarios directly on the device's screen. In this self-administered format, respondents view the video content—typically featuring an interviewer or visual stimuli—often accompanied by audio narration for reinforcement, while entering their responses independently via keyboard, mouse, touch screen, or other input methods. This approach enhances engagement by simulating personal interaction and supports complex question delivery without requiring interviewer involvement. The method emerged in the late as a technological advancement over text-based CASI, with early prototypes tested in the using computers for sensitive surveys. Its adoption expanded in the , facilitated by improvements in video compression algorithms, increased storage capacities, and the rise of portable devices with high-resolution displays, enabling more seamless and mobile implementations. Technical requirements for Video-CASI exceed those of basic CASI due to the multimedia demands, including devices such as laptops or tablets with sufficient processing power, screen resolution for clear video playback, and storage or bandwidth to handle video files. Software must support integrated video playback, often embedded within survey platforms that allow branching logic and synchronization, ensuring smooth respondent navigation. Applications of Video-CASI are particularly valuable in behavioral studies addressing sensitive topics, such as use, sexual , or reporting, where visual cues help reduce and improve data accuracy. It has also been adapted for specialized populations, including deaf respondents through videos presented alongside text, facilitating accessible self-administration in surveys like those on or demographics conducted with over 200 participants. is preserved via isolated viewing, typically with to prevent auditory disclosure in shared settings. In educational contexts, it supports assessments by embedding scenario-based videos for respondent reflection.

Advantages and disadvantages

Advantages

Computer-assisted personal interviewing (CAPI) offers significant efficiency gains over traditional paper-and-pencil methods, primarily through automated skip logic and entry that streamline . By automatically respondents to relevant questions based on prior answers, CAPI eliminates manual navigation errors and reduces overall duration; one study found a more than 50% decrease in interview time due to interviewer learning effects after initial CAPI use, allowing interviewers to complete more surveys per day. Additionally, the immediate of responses bypasses manual transcription, enabling faster and without the need for separate entry stages, which can shorten project timelines from weeks to days. Accuracy improvements are a core advantage of CAPI, driven by built-in validation checks that flag inconsistencies, invalid entries, or out-of-range responses during the interview. These features reduce data errors substantially; for instance, logic and range checks can prevent up to 80% of skip pattern errors observed in paper surveys, where interviewers often miss or incorrectly apply instructions. elements, such as images or audio prompts, further enhance respondent comprehension and response quality, particularly for complex or sensitive questions, leading to more reliable datasets. In high-risk group surveys, CAPI achieved over 90% complete data capture across domains by minimizing missing values and duplicates through automated prompts. CAPI's adaptability allows for seamless customization across variants like computer-assisted self-interviewing (CASI) for privacy-sensitive topics, with reusable software lowering long-term costs by reducing reliance on printed materials and manual coding. This flexibility supports integration of features such as GPS for location verification or audio aids for accessibility, making it suitable for diverse field environments without extensive redesign. Over time, the investment in digital tools yields cost savings, as electronic systems eliminate printing and storage expenses while enabling scalable deployment for large-scale studies. From the respondent's perspective, CAPI enhances through user-friendly interfaces, including progress bars and interactive elements that make interviews feel less burdensome and more dynamic. These choices improve completion rates by fostering a sense of control and reducing fatigue, especially in longer sessions. Personal contact combined with technology also builds rapport, encouraging fuller participation compared to static paper forms.

Disadvantages

Computer-assisted personal interviewing (CAPI) involves significant upfront financial investments, primarily in hardware and . Rugged devices such as tablets or laptops for field use typically cost between $300 and $1,500 per unit as of 2025, with higher-end models reaching up to $3,000 depending on specifications like battery life and durability. for programming complex questionnaires adds further expenses, often requiring specialized expertise to incorporate skip patterns and validations. for interviewers, which covers both survey content and technical operation, can increase overall budget by 10-20% compared to traditional methods, as it demands additional time for device handling and . Technical vulnerabilities pose ongoing risks during fieldwork. Device failures, including battery drain in remote or off-grid areas without charging access, can halt interviews and lead to incomplete . Software bugs may disrupt question flow, such as limitations in navigating back through responses or handling complex loops, potentially shortening questionnaires or causing errors. Without regular backups or offline storage, is a critical concern; corrupted files prior to server upload are irrecoverable, exacerbating issues in areas with poor connectivity. Human factors introduce potential biases and discomfort. Reliance on interviewers can lead to unintentional through verbal cues or , even with scripted prompts, particularly on sensitive topics. Respondents in low-digital regions may experience unease with the technology, feeling intimidated by screens or wary of processes. Scalability challenges limit CAPI's efficiency for expansive studies. In large samples, the need for multiple devices and physical travel slows deployment, especially in dispersed rural settings where logistics strain resources. risks arise if protocols fail, heightening concerns over unauthorized access to during in-person sessions.

Comparison with other methods

Vs. paper-and-pencil interviewing (PAPI)

Computer-assisted personal interviewing (CAPI) offers several improvements in over traditional paper-and-pencil interviewing (PAPI) by minimizing during . In PAPI, interviewers must manually record responses on forms, which can lead to illegible , transcription mistakes, and routing errors where skips or branches are overlooked. CAPI eliminates these issues through direct electronic entry and programmed logic checks that validate responses in real time, enforcing consistency and reducing interviewer variance. Studies have shown that CAPI significantly reduces skip errors compared to PAPI through automated , with some experiments reporting near-elimination of such errors in CAPI. Additionally, CAPI significantly lowers rates of ; for example, in self-administered computer-assisted modes, missing data averaged 5.7% versus 14.1% in paper-based methods, with similar reductions observed in CAPI. Overall, while some experiments find minimal differences across most variables, CAPI generally achieves higher accuracy, particularly in complex surveys with intricate question sequences. Workflow differences between CAPI and PAPI are pronounced, primarily due to the elimination of post-interview data processing in CAPI. PAPI requires a separate, labor-intensive stage of manual data entry and coding after fieldwork, which is prone to additional errors and delays. In contrast, CAPI allows interviewers to input responses directly into portable devices, bypassing this step entirely and enabling immediate data availability for analysis. Branching logic in CAPI further streamlines the process by automatically directing interviewers to relevant questions based on prior responses, a feature absent in PAPI where manual navigation can disrupt interview flow. This automation not only reduces the overall time from data collection to usable output but also facilitates the inclusion of open-ended responses without subsequent transcription. Regarding cost and speed, CAPI involves higher upfront investments in , software programming, and interviewer compared to the low initial costs of PAPI materials like paper forms. However, these costs are offset in larger or more complex surveys, where CAPI's efficiencies lead to substantial savings by avoiding labor and reducing cleaning time for errors. Processing speed is notably faster with CAPI, as electronic data can be transmitted and analyzed promptly after interviews, whereas PAPI workflows are slowed by manual handling, which also increases risks of lost or damaged questionnaires. For example, in surveys with thousands of cases, such as national labor force studies, CAPI's streamlined approach results in quicker turnaround without compromising quality. PAPI remains more economical for small-scale, simple studies but scales poorly for extensive . Respondent interaction in CAPI maintains the face-to-face central to personal interviewing, similar to PAPI, while introducing dynamic elements that enhance engagement. Both methods allow interviewers to build trust directly with participants, but CAPI's enables personalized follow-up questions by pulling from earlier responses or stored , such as using a respondent's name in prompts for a more conversational feel. Respondents typically do not find the computer interface intimidating, and it can even lend a professional air to the process. Unlike PAPI, which relies on static forms, CAPI supports adaptive questioning without manual adjustments, potentially improving response rates and depth in sensitive or branched topics.

Vs. other computer-assisted methods

Computer-assisted personal interviewing (CAPI) differs from (CATI) in its in-person delivery, which permits the incorporation of visual aids like images, diagrams, or showcards to enhance respondent comprehension of complex questions—capabilities unavailable in audio-only telephone formats. The face-to-face setting of CAPI also fosters rapport between interviewers and respondents, encouraging greater participation and yielding higher response rates; for instance, a U.S. Bureau evaluation reported CAPI response rates of 85% compared to 25% for CATI in a mixed-mode context. However, CAPI incurs higher costs than CATI owing to interviewer travel, training, and fieldwork logistics. Compared to computer-assisted web interviewing (CAWI), CAPI extends reach to individuals lacking or digital skills, thereby including non-internet users and mitigating non-response linked to the . The presence of an interviewer in CAPI supports in-person identity verification and real-time probing or clarification, which proves advantageous for intricate or sensitive topics demanding nuanced guidance. In contrast, CAWI offers greater speed and lower costs through self-administration without fieldwork demands, though it may exclude offline populations. Overall, CAPI's mode effects reduce non-response biases arising from technological barriers, unlike CAWI's reliance on digital infrastructure. Hybrid designs leveraging CAPI for hard-to-reach groups alongside CAWI for accessible ones balance coverage, response quality, and expenses. CAPI is particularly suited for selection in complex, in-depth surveys where interviewer probes are essential to uncover detailed insights.

Applications and research

Use in surveys and studies

Computer-assisted personal interviewing (CAPI) has been widely deployed in demographic and health surveys to collect household-level data on population characteristics, fertility, mortality, and health indicators. In the United States, the Census Bureau has utilized CAPI since the early 1990s in major surveys, including the Current Population Survey starting in 1994 and the American Community Survey, where interviewers use laptop computers to administer questionnaires during in-person visits. Internationally, the Demographic and Health Surveys (DHS) program, which conducts multi-country studies in collaboration with organizations like the World Health Organization, adopted CAPI starting with the 2005 Colombia survey and has since implemented it in numerous low- and middle-income countries for efficient household data capture using handheld devices. The World Health Survey Plus further employs CAPI methods across countries to gather data on health systems and population well-being through face-to-face interviews. In , CAPI facilitates in-home interviews for consumer panels, enabling the integration of elements such as images or videos to assess product preferences and usage patterns. For instance, the U.S. ' Consumer Expenditure Survey transitioned to CAPI in 2003, allowing interviewers to record detailed spending data directly on computers during personal visits to households. This approach supports entry and complex question routing in studies focused on consumer behavior and market trends. Social science research employs CAPI variants, including computer-assisted self-interviewing (CASI), in longitudinal panels to handle sensitive topics like and family dynamics while maintaining respondent privacy during in-person sessions. The U.S. Census Bureau's Survey of and Program Participation (SIPP), a key tracking economic , has integrated CAPI since the 1990s to streamline data collection on program participation and household changes. In development contexts, particularly in low-resource areas, the World Bank's Development Impact Monitoring and Evaluation (DIME) unit deploys mobile CAPI for poverty assessments through initiatives like the Living Standards Measurement Study (LSMS), where tablet-based interviews enable rapid data gathering on household consumption and assets in remote settings. These applications support evidence-based policy-making in regions with limited infrastructure. Post-2020, CAPI has increasingly been incorporated into hybrid mixed-mode surveys, combining face-to-face interviews with online or telephone components to adapt to disruptions like the while covering diverse populations. For example, Chile's 2024 national census primarily utilized CAPI with mobile devices for data collection. This trend enhances flexibility in large-scale studies across sectors.

Key research findings

Studies from the 1990s, including a in the National Longitudinal Survey of Youth (NLS/Y), demonstrated that CAPI significantly improved data quality compared to PAPI by eliminating routing errors and reducing rates. In the NLS/Y experiment, CAPI achieved 0% due to illegal skips, versus approximately 1% in PAPI, while overall item nonresponse was lower in CAPI (e.g., 5.7% versus 14.1% in some pilots). Additionally, CAPI shortened interview length by about 20%, from 57 minutes in PAPI to 47 minutes initially, further decreasing to 41 minutes with interviewer experience, which contributed to fewer respondent-induced errors. For sensitive behaviors, variants like computer-assisted self-interviewing (CASI) within CAPI frameworks reduced underreporting by enhancing respondent disclosure. Reviews of evidence indicate that CASI increases reporting of risky sexual behaviors and drug use, with one study showing higher acknowledgment of use (66.1% in CAPI versus 58.5% in PAPI for males) and perceived greater confidentiality (47% of respondents). Meta-analyses confirm that self-administered computer modes lead to significantly more reporting of socially undesirable behaviors compared to interviewer-led PAPI, mitigating . Meta-analyses from the highlight CAPI's advantages in response rates and minimization, particularly in face-to-face settings. Face-to-face CAPI achieved cooperation rates of 50-70%, outperforming remote methods like or surveys, where rates were often 10-20% lower. These reviews found minimal mode effects on factual reporting, with nonresponse lower in mixed-mode approaches including CAPI compared to purely remote modes, though interviewer effects persisted. Cost-benefit analyses, including those from World Bank experiments in the 2010s, indicate that CAPI yields long-term savings after initial hardware and training investments. A randomized field trial in showed CAPI reduced interview times and errors, leading to overall cost efficiencies through faster and lower post-collection editing needs, with estimates of 15-25% savings in repeated surveys. Audio and video CASI variants further improved and cost-effectiveness in diverse, low-literacy populations by reducing and requirements. Post-2020 research on mobile CAPI during the underscores its adaptability for in-person with tablets or phones, while revealing equity challenges. Studies documented successful pivots to hybrid mobile CAPI in low-contact scenarios, maintaining high in surveys, but highlighted digital divides exacerbating exclusion of low-income or rural respondents without device access. Bank-led phone adaptations of CAPI principles during lockdowns emphasized rapid deployment benefits but noted persistent tech equity issues in developing contexts.

References

  1. https://dimewiki.worldbank.org/Computer-Assisted_Personal_Interviews_(CAPI)
  2. https://methods.sagepub.com/ency/edvol/encyclopedia-of-survey-research-methods/chpt/computerassisted-personal-interviewing-capi
  3. http://www.asasrms.org/Proceedings/papers/1996_130.pdf
  4. https://www.aeaweb.org/content/file?id=6224
  5. https://www.nlsinfo.org/content/cohorts/nlsy79/other-documentation/codebook-supplement/nlsy79-appendix-13-development
  6. https://unstats.un.org/unsd/demographic-social/meetings/2018/cairo-census-tfm/guidelines.pdf
  7. https://statspolicy.gov/assets/fcsm/files/docs/spwp19.pdf
  8. https://nces.ed.gov/fcsm/pdf/J4_Sun_2015FCSM.pdf
  9. https://nap.nationalacademies.org/read/10695/chapter/2
  10. http://www.blaiseusers.org/2009/papers/Keynote.pdf
  11. https://www.bls.gov/osmr/research-papers/2003/pdf/st030330.pdf
  12. https://www.blaise.com/blaise/about-blaise
  13. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/229338934_Improving_consumption_measurement_and_other_survey_data_through_CAPI_Evidence_from_a_randomized_experiment
  14. https://www.econstor.eu/bitstream/10419/71759/1/Schr%C3%A4pler_2010_Changing-PAPI-CAPI.pdf
  15. https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/deveco/v98y2012i1p19-33.html
  16. https://dimewiki.worldbank.org/Computer-Assisted_Personal_Interviews_%28CAPI%29
  17. https://www.ilo.org/media/284166/download
  18. https://www.geopoll.com/blog/computer-assisted-personal-interviewing-capi/
  19. https://nipo.com/blog/things-to-consider-when-buying-capi-fieldwork-devices
  20. https://www.voxco.com/resources/a-short-guide-to-capi-survey-software
  21. https://www.geopoll.com/blog/computer-assisted-personal-interviewing-capi
  22. https://www.gesis.org/fileadmin/admin/Dateikatalog/pdf/guidelines/general_interviewer_training_git_capi_daikeler_silber_bosnjak_zabal_martin_2017.pdf
  23. https://tgmresearch.com/capi-surveys-computer-assisted-personal-interviewing.html
  24. https://docs.mysurvey.solutions/getting-started/overview-printable/resources/GS-CAPI-SUSO-BROCHURE-05.pdf
  25. https://dimewiki.worldbank.org/Computer-Assisted_Personal_Interviews_%2528CAPI%2529
  26. https://www.census.gov/content/dam/Census/programs-surveys/international-programs/stic/evaluating-a-pilot-electronic-census.pdf
  27. https://www.rugstorm.com/en/how-much-does-a-rugged-tablet-cost-price-explained/
  28. https://dimewiki.worldbank.org/Survey_Pilot
  29. https://methods.sagepub.com/ency/edvol/encyclopedia-of-survey-research-methods/chpt/computerassisted-selfinterviewing-casi
  30. https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/1525822X03254714
  31. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC2572260/
  32. https://www.hptn.org/sites/default/files/inline-files/084SSP_Section_14_CASI_V3.0_04Jan2022.pdf
  33. https://methods.sagepub.com/ency/edvol/encyclopedia-of-survey-research-methods/chpt/audio-computerassisted-selfinterviewing-acasi
  34. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC4511474/
  35. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC5454788/
  36. https://acasillc.com/acasi.htm
  37. https://www.novaresearch.com/products/qds/QDSHelp50/Content/The_Audio_Computer_Administered_Self_Interview__ACASI__Module/ACASI_Build_Options.htm
  38. https://psychiatryonline.org/doi/full/10.1176/ps.2007.58.6.743
  39. https://stacks.cdc.gov/view/cdc/127209
  40. https://www.younglives.org.uk/sites/default/files/2025-10/YL-TN61-ACASI_TN_FINAL.pdf
  41. https://methods.sagepub.com/ency/edvol/encyclopedia-of-survey-research-methods/chpt/video-computerassisted-selfinterviewing-vcasi
  42. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC3279921/
  43. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/240690877_Video_Computer-Assisted_Self-Administered_Interviews_for_Deaf_Respondents
  44. https://www.econstor.eu/bitstream/10419/60327/1/720454743.pdf
  45. https://sru.soc.surrey.ac.uk/SRU3.html
  46. https://www.asasrms.org/Proceedings/papers/1995_089.pdf
  47. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC5974824/
  48. https://insightsopinion.com/capi/top-benefits-of-using-capi-for-large-scale-field-surveys
  49. https://rotatorsurvey.com/en/capi-surveys
  50. https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1749&context=sociologyfacpub
  51. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/44132207_The_effect_of_computer-assisted_interviewing_on_data_quality_a_review_of_the_evidence
  52. https://openknowledge.worldbank.org/server/api/core/bitstreams/7aad9cf4-06b4-5332-8ff2-9dc51ec1f016/content
  53. https://www.bls.gov/osmr/research-papers/1991/nl910010.htm
  54. https://gss.norc.org/content/dam/gss/get-documentation/pdf/reports/methodological-reports/MR126.pdf
  55. https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2016/10/03/2016-23821/submission-for-omb-review-comment-request
  56. https://www.geopoll.com/blog/capi-cati-cawi-research-methods/
  57. https://repositori.upf.edu/bitstream/handle/10230/43540/Revilla_smr_qual.pdf
  58. https://www.geopoll.com/blog/capi-surveys-guide/
  59. https://share-eric.eu/fileadmin/user_upload/SHARE_Working_Paper/SHARE_WP_93-2024.pdf
  60. https://www.europeansocialsurvey.org/sites/default/files/2023-06/The%2520effect%2520of%2520mixed%2520mode%2520survey%2520designs.pdf
  61. https://www2.census.gov/programs-surveys/cps/methodology/CPS-Tech-Paper-77.pdf
  62. https://www2.census.gov/programs-surveys/acs/methodology/design_and_methodology/2024/acs_design_methodology_ch15_2024.pdf
  63. https://blog.dhsprogram.com/harnessing-technology-streamline-data-collection/
  64. https://apps.who.int/healthinfo/systems/surveydata/index.php/catalog/WHSPlus/about
  65. https://www.bls.gov/cex/anthology/csxanth2.pdf
  66. https://www.census.gov/content/dam/Census/library/working-papers/1996/demo/SIPP-WP-226.pdf
  67. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0304387811001167
  68. https://blogs.worldbank.org/en/opendata/counting-smarter--chile-embraces-a-digital-transformation-in-its
  69. https://www.ipsos.com/en-us/knowledge/society/embracing-mixed-mode-research
  70. https://ssrs.com/news/recent-innovations-and-advances-in-mixed-mode-surveys/
  71. http://www.asasrms.org/Proceedings/papers/1994_146.pdf
  72. https://link.springer.com/article/10.3758/s13428-014-0533-4
  73. https://www.joophox.net/publist/IJPOR07.pdf
  74. https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/00131640021970934
  75. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10019664/
  76. https://dmeo.gov.in/sites/default/files/2022-02/Comparative_Assessment_CAPI_tools_vF.pdf
  77. https://www.surveycto.com/events-trends/pandemic-pivot-shift-from-capi-to-cati/
  78. https://blogs.worldbank.org/en/impactevaluations/mobile-phone-surveys-understanding-covid-19-impacts-part-i-sampling-and-mode
  79. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/354239085_High-Frequency_Phone_Surveys_on_COVID-19_Good_Practices_Open_Questions
Add your contribution
Related Hubs
Contribute something
User Avatar
No comments yet.