A Cost–Benefit Analysis of Reinterview Designs for Estimating and Adjusting Mode Measurement Effects: A Case Study for the Dutch Health Survey and Labour Force Survey

IF 1.6 4区数学 Q2 SOCIAL SCIENCES, MATHEMATICAL METHODS

Journal of Survey Statistics and Methodology Pub Date : 2024-03-28 DOI:10.1093/jssam/smae011

Barry Schouten, Thomas Klausch, B. Buelens, Jan van den Brakel

{"title":"A Cost–Benefit Analysis of Reinterview Designs for Estimating and Adjusting Mode Measurement Effects: A Case Study for the Dutch Health Survey and Labour Force Survey","authors":"Barry Schouten, Thomas Klausch, B. Buelens, Jan van den Brakel","doi":"10.1093/jssam/smae011","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n Reinterview designs are a potential tool to estimate and adjust for mode measurement effects, that is, relative differences in mode-specific measurement error bias. In 2011, a reinterview design was successfully applied to the Dutch Crime Victimization Survey, which led to a redesign of the survey. Reinterview designs may, however, be very costly, especially when face to face is included as a survey mode. The crucial question is whether benefits outweigh costs, that is, whether the potential increase in the accuracy of survey statistics is worth the investment. The answer to this question depends heavily on the purpose of the reinterview, that is, assessment versus adjustment, the size of the measurement effects, and the relative cost of the modes. Reinterview designs also make a number of assumptions that will not hold for every setting. In this article, we perform a cost–benefit analysis for two surveys, the Dutch Health Survey and the Dutch Labour Force Survey, and discuss the utility and validity of reinterviews. We conclude that a reinterview may not be useful due to relatively small measurement differences for the Labour Force Survey, whereas it may be useful for the Health Survey.","PeriodicalId":17146,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Survey Statistics and Methodology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-03-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Survey Statistics and Methodology","FirstCategoryId":"100","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/jssam/smae011","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"数学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"SOCIAL SCIENCES, MATHEMATICAL METHODS","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Abstract

Reinterview designs are a potential tool to estimate and adjust for mode measurement effects, that is, relative differences in mode-specific measurement error bias. In 2011, a reinterview design was successfully applied to the Dutch Crime Victimization Survey, which led to a redesign of the survey. Reinterview designs may, however, be very costly, especially when face to face is included as a survey mode. The crucial question is whether benefits outweigh costs, that is, whether the potential increase in the accuracy of survey statistics is worth the investment. The answer to this question depends heavily on the purpose of the reinterview, that is, assessment versus adjustment, the size of the measurement effects, and the relative cost of the modes. Reinterview designs also make a number of assumptions that will not hold for every setting. In this article, we perform a cost–benefit analysis for two surveys, the Dutch Health Survey and the Dutch Labour Force Survey, and discuss the utility and validity of reinterviews. We conclude that a reinterview may not be useful due to relatively small measurement differences for the Labour Force Survey, whereas it may be useful for the Health Survey.

查看原文本刊更多论文

估计和调整模式测量效应的重访设计的成本效益分析：荷兰健康调查和劳动力调查案例研究

重访设计是估算和调整模式测量效应（即特定模式测量误差偏差的相对差异）的一种潜在工具。2011 年，重新访谈设计成功应用于荷兰犯罪受害情况调查，并由此对调查进行了重新设计。然而，重新访谈设计的成本可能会很高，尤其是在将面对面调查作为一种调查模式时。关键的问题是收益是否大于成本，也就是说，调查统计数据准确性的潜在提高是否值得投资。这个问题的答案在很大程度上取决于再访谈的目的，即评估还是调整、测量效应的大小以及各种模式的相对成本。重新访谈的设计还需要做出一些假设，而这些假设并非在任何情况下都成立。在本文中，我们对荷兰健康调查和荷兰劳动力调查这两项调查进行了成本效益分析，并讨论了重新访谈的效用和有效性。我们得出的结论是，由于劳动力调查的测量差异相对较小，重新访谈可能并无用处，而健康调查则可能有用。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

求助全文

约1分钟内获得全文求助全文

来源期刊

Journal of Survey Statistics and Methodology Multiple-

CiteScore

4.30

自引率

9.50%

发文量

期刊介绍： The Journal of Survey Statistics and Methodology, sponsored by AAPOR and the American Statistical Association, began publishing in 2013. Its objective is to publish cutting edge scholarly articles on statistical and methodological issues for sample surveys, censuses, administrative record systems, and other related data. It aims to be the flagship journal for research on survey statistics and methodology. Topics of interest include survey sample design, statistical inference, nonresponse, measurement error, the effects of modes of data collection, paradata and responsive survey design, combining data from multiple sources, record linkage, disclosure limitation, and other issues in survey statistics and methodology. The journal publishes both theoretical and applied papers, provided the theory is motivated by an important applied problem and the applied papers report on research that contributes generalizable knowledge to the field. Review papers are also welcomed. Papers on a broad range of surveys are encouraged, including (but not limited to) surveys concerning business, economics, marketing research, social science, environment, epidemiology, biostatistics and official statistics. The journal has three sections. The Survey Statistics section presents papers on innovative sampling procedures, imputation, weighting, measures of uncertainty, small area inference, new methods of analysis, and other statistical issues related to surveys. The Survey Methodology section presents papers that focus on methodological research, including methodological experiments, methods of data collection and use of paradata. The Applications section contains papers involving innovative applications of methods and providing practical contributions and guidance, and/or significant new findings.