Differences in Efficiencies Between ABS and RDD Samples by Mode of Data Collection.

Carol Pierannunzi, Sonya Gamble, Robynne Locke, Naomi Freedner, Machell Town
{"title":"Differences in Efficiencies Between ABS and RDD Samples by Mode of Data Collection.","authors":"Carol Pierannunzi, Sonya Gamble, Robynne Locke, Naomi Freedner, Machell Town","doi":"10.29115/sp-2019-0006","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Research on mode of administration of surveys increasingly appears in the literature. Little research includes comparisons by sample frame as well as by mode. This research examines differences in efficiency using two types of sample frames (address-based samples [ABS] or random digit dialing [RDD] samples) and multiple modes (web-based surveys, mailed questionnaire, and telephone interview) among adult respondents. Matching telephone numbers to addresses was conducted on both samples. A test of the effectiveness of making modifications to drop point locations in the ABS was also undertaken. A higher proportion of addresses were matched to telephone numbers in an ABS but with less accuracy than matching telephone numbers to addresses in an RDD sample. Costs per competed interview were lower using the RDD than when using the ABS. Efforts to specify apartment numbers in drop point locations in the ABS were not found to be cost effective. Overall, for both demographic and substantive question outcomes, survey frame has less of an impact than survey mode on measures of response rate and cost.</p>","PeriodicalId":74893,"journal":{"name":"Survey practice","volume":"12 1","pages":"1-12"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8040487/pdf/nihms-1680310.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Survey practice","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.29115/sp-2019-0006","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Research on mode of administration of surveys increasingly appears in the literature. Little research includes comparisons by sample frame as well as by mode. This research examines differences in efficiency using two types of sample frames (address-based samples [ABS] or random digit dialing [RDD] samples) and multiple modes (web-based surveys, mailed questionnaire, and telephone interview) among adult respondents. Matching telephone numbers to addresses was conducted on both samples. A test of the effectiveness of making modifications to drop point locations in the ABS was also undertaken. A higher proportion of addresses were matched to telephone numbers in an ABS but with less accuracy than matching telephone numbers to addresses in an RDD sample. Costs per competed interview were lower using the RDD than when using the ABS. Efforts to specify apartment numbers in drop point locations in the ABS were not found to be cost effective. Overall, for both demographic and substantive question outcomes, survey frame has less of an impact than survey mode on measures of response rate and cost.

ABS和RDD样本在数据收集方式上的效率差异。
关于调查管理模式的研究越来越多地出现在文献中。很少有研究包括按样本帧和按模式的比较。本研究使用两种类型的样本框架(基于地址的样本[ABS]或随机数字拨号[RDD]样本)和多种模式(网络调查、邮寄问卷和电话访谈)对成人受访者的效率差异进行了研究。对两个样本进行了电话号码和地址的比对。还进行了对ABS中落点位置进行修改的有效性测试。ABS中与电话号码匹配的地址比例较高,但与RDD样本中与电话号码匹配的地址相比,其准确性较低。使用RDD的每次竞争面试成本低于使用ABS时的成本。在ABS中指定落点位置的公寓号码的努力并不具有成本效益。总体而言,对于人口统计和实质性问题结果,调查框架对回复率和成本测量的影响小于调查模式。
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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信