# Pretest a survey recall period Check which experience people recall before choosing a survey reference period. Use free-text probes and an explicit out-of-window case. If nothing was unclear or difficult, say so. Skip questions about steps you did not experience; use not applicable where appropriate. ## 1. Which interaction came to mind when you read the question? Answer: ____________________ ## 2. Approximately when did it happen, if you remember? Answer: ____________________ ## 3. How did you decide it belonged in the stated period? Answer: ____________________ ## 4. What would you do if you could not recall an interaction in that period? Answer: ____________________ ## Author notes / illustrative keys where applicable 1. Identify the selected episode without requesting private interaction contents. 2. Allow uncertainty instead of manufacturing an exact date. 3. Check whether people used the same time boundary as the question. 4. Test a skip or no-applicable-experience route. Interpretation caution: A few pilot interviews cannot establish population recall accuracy. Do not convert uncertain dates into exact values or average them with known dates. ## Illustrative finding and follow-up Observation: Synthetic pilot episodes are five days ago, 12 days ago, 41 days ago and unknown; the draft’s period is the past 30 days. Action to test: Clarify the 30-day boundary and no-experience route; keep the 41-day and unknown cases visible as interpretation issues. Follow-up: Pilot the revision with new volunteers and check whether their chosen episodes match the stated period; retain reasons for uncertainty. ## Collection protocol When and whom to ask: Run the optional pilot before fielding the main questionnaire with people similar to the intended respondents. Decision owner: The questionnaire reviewer chooses the period based on the decision and the pilot evidence. Follow-up: Review episode-selection explanations after revision; do not claim the pilot proves that every future answer is accurate. Response handling: Do not request private messages or precise personal event histories. Approximate dates and not remembered are acceptable. ## Worked measurement study All example records are synthetic; manual worksheet, no automatic import. ### Inspect the synthetic example Invented pilot ID | Recalled timing | Treatment --- | --- | --- P1 | 5 days ago | Inside stated window P2 | 12 days ago | Inside stated window P3 | 41 days ago | Outside stated window P4 | Unknown | Keep uncertainty ### Derivation Two known episodes are within 30 days; one is outside; one is unknown. These are pilot cases, not a recall-accuracy percentage or a valid population sample. Pilot note: the period is interpreted inconsistently; revise boundary wording and retain unknown timing instead of forcing a date. ### Event sequence P1 / 5 days ago / Known, within window P2 / 12 days ago / Known, within window P3 / 41 days ago / Known, outside window P4 / Timing unknown / Not forced into a date ### Evidence boundary Observed / Four episode-selection explanations / Supports a specific wording revision to test. Unknown / Population recall error / Do not report an accuracy benchmark. Next check / Pilot the revised wording with new volunteers / Look for boundary misunderstandings and skip clarity. ### Method references AAPOR survey best practices: https://aapor.org/standards-and-ethics/best-practices/ — Pretesting and transparent sample context.