| Research Design: |
Project on Human Development in Chicago
Neighborhoods
The city of Chicago was selected as the research site for the PHDCN
because of its extensive racial, ethnic, and social-class diversity.
The project collapsed 847 census tracts in the city of Chicago into
343 neighborhood clusters (NCs) based upon seven groupings of
racial/ethnic composition and three levels of socioeconomic status.
The NCs were designed to be ecologically meaningful. They were
composed of geographically contiguous census tracts and geographic
boundaries, and knowledge of Chicago's neighborhoods were considered
in the definition of the NCs. Each NC was comprised of approximately
8,000 people.
Longitudinal Cohort Study
For the Longitudinal Cohort Study, a stratified probability sample
of 80 neighborhoods was selected. The 80 NCs were sampled from the 21
strata (seven racial/ethnic groups by three socioeconomic levels) with
the goal of representing the 21 cells as equally as possible to
eliminate the confounding between racial/ethnic mix and socioeconomic
status. Once the 80 NCs were chosen, then block groups were selected
at random within each of the sample neighborhoods. A complete listing
of dwelling units was collected for all sampled block groups.
Pregnant women, children, and young adults in seven age cohorts
(birth, 3, 6, 9, 12, 15, and 18 years) were identified through
in-person screening of approximately 40,000 dwelling units within the
80 NCs. The screening response rate was 80 percent. Children within
six months of the birthday that qualified them for the sample were
selected for inclusion in the Longitudinal Cohort Study. A total of
8,347 participants were identified through the screening. Of the
eligible study participants, 6,228 were interviewed.
For all cohorts except 0 and 18, primary caregivers as well as the
child were interviewed. The primary caregiver was the person found to
spend the most time taking care of the child. Separate research
assistants administered the primary caregiver interviews and the child
interviews. The primary method of data collection was face-to-face
interviewing, although participants who refused to complete the
personal interview were administered a phone interview. Interviews
were conducted in Spanish, English, and Polish. In Wave 1 the complete
protocol was translated into Spanish and Polish. An interpreter was
hired for participants who spoke a language other than English,
Spanish, or Polish. Depending on the age and wave of data collection,
participants were paid between $5 and $20 per interview. Other
incentives, such as free passes to museums, the aquarium, and monthly
drawing prizes were also included.
Interview protocols included a wide range of questions. For
example, some questions assessed impulse control and sensation-seeking
traits, cognitive and language development, leisure activities,
delinquency and substance abuse, friends' activities, and
self-perception, attitudes, and values. Caregivers were also
interviewed about family structure, parent characteristics,
parent-child relationships, parent discipline styles, family mental
health, and family history of criminal behavior and drug use.
Employment and Income Interview
The Employment and Income Interview was completed by primary
caregivers (Cohorts 0 to 15) and subjects (Cohort 18). The interview
contained questions regarding the employment status and income earned
by the respondents in order to give an overview of the economic
conditions under which the Longitudinal Cohort Study participants
lived. Each respondent was asked to respond to questions concerning
the details of his or her partner's employment and salary to give a
complete summary of the household's economic situation. The response
format for the Employment and Income Interview varied from question to
question. Some questions were petitioned straightforward, yes or no
responses. Other questions offered multiple choices of which the
respondent was permitted to select the one response which best
described their situation. Multiple responses were permitted for
questions regarding the respondent's transportation to work.
Additionally, there were questions that allowed for open-ended
responses. |
