Sampling gay men: Random Digit Dialing versus sources in the Gay Community.
OBJECTIVE
To assess the feasibility of obtaining a probability sample of gay/bisexual men using Random Digit Dialing (RDD), assess its validity, and describe differences between such a sample and a sample recruited from sources in the gay community.


METHODS
Two samples, one of men participating in an event at the Gay Community Center (N = 26) and one of randomly selected men (N = 52), were recruited by telephone in targeted New York City neighborhoods. A five-minute questionnaire for identifying gay/bisexual men was administered. Respondents who identified themselves as gay/bisexual were also asked about their gay identity and level of affiliation with the gay community.


RESULTS
The screen questionnaire had excellent sensitivity (.96) in identifying gay/bisexual men. RDD sampling identified a high percent of gay/bisexual-identified men (29%). Gay/bisexual men identified through the RDD technique were qualitatively different from gay/bisexual men contacted through the gay community: they were less affiliated with the gay community, had higher levels of internalized homophobia, and differed in the attitudes they endorsed.


CONCLUSIONS
To reduce bias imported by sampling highly affiliated respondents, RDD sampling techniques should, and can, be used in studies of gay/bisexual men.
Meyer
I H
IH
Division of Sociomedical Sciences, Columbia University, School of Public Health, New York, NY 10032, USA. im15@columbia.edu
Colten
M E
ME
D000328:Adult; D005240:Feasibility Studies; D018451:Homosexuality, Male / Q000706:statistics & numerical data*; D006801:Humans; D007407:Interviews as Topic; D008297:Male; D009519:New York City; D011897:Random Allocation; D012107:Research Design; D012494:Sampling Studies; D013689:Telephone