Which Is the Better Investment for Nonresponse Adjustment
Purchasing Commercial Auxiliary Data or Collecting Interviewer Observations
Bibliographic Data
| ID | 7362905 |
|---|---|
| Authors | Jennifer Sinibaldi (0000-0002-4628-5721), Mark Trappmann (0009-0000-0512-1061), Frauke Kreuter (0000-0002-7339-2645) |
| Year | 2014 |
| Volume | 78 |
| Issue | 2 |
| Pages | 440-473 |
| Publication date | 2014-06-01 |
| Peer Reviewed | Yes |
| Open Access | No |
| Type | ARTICLE |
| Venue | Public Opinion Quarterly (JOURNAL) |
| Journal identifiers | ISSN: 0033-362X • E-ISSN: 1537-5331 |
| Publisher | Oxford University Press (OUP) (PUBLISHER) |
| DOI | 10.1093/poq/nfu003 |
| OpenAlex | W2104876883 |
| Language | EN |
| Citations received | 8 |
| References cited | 11 |
Survey methodologists are searching for covariates to use in nonresponse adjustment models, ultimately hoping to find variables that are highly correlated with both the outcomes of interest and the propensity to respond. These covariates can come from auxiliary data that provide information on both respondents and nonrespondents. Two such types of auxiliary data are interviewer observations (a form of paradata) and commercially available data on small areas or households. Interviewer observations intended for use in nonresponse adjustment can be specifically designed to match the outcome variables of interest, while commercial data provide a broad set of small area descriptors that may be correlated with multiple outcomes. This analysis examines these two data sources to determine which is more predictive of the outcomes of interest for a particular survey, thereby fulfilling one of the criteria for a good adjustment variable. The outcomes of interest in this analysis are self-reports of household income and receipt of unemployment benefits from a survey of labor market participation. The findings suggest that at this point in time, compared to commercial data, interviewer observations are better at predicting these outcomes, particularly in the subpopulation that the survey targets. Therefore, the observations share more (accurate) information with the true value, making them better for adjustment on this dimension. The results will inform the work of both researchers wishing to improve their nonresponse adjustments and survey managers looking to make better use of their survey budget
Business · Econometrics · Economics · Interview · Investment (military · Political science · Purchasing · Statistics · Food Security and Health in Diverse Populations · Mathematics · Psychology · Survey Methodology and Nonresponse · Urban, Neighborhood, and Segregation Studies · Marketing
The effects of propensity score weighting on attrition biases in attitudinal, behavioral, and socio-demographic variables in a short-term web-based panel survey
The effect of interviewer evaluation of respondents’ attitudes and understanding on future survey participation in a panel study
Novel Insights From Interviewer Assessments of Personal Attributes, Home Environment, and Residential Context in NSHAP
Using Paradata to Predict and Correct for Panel Attrition
Sources of Variance in the Accuracy of Interviewer Observations
Do Interviewer Assessments of Respondents’ Performance Accurately Reflect Response Behavior
Using Call-Level Interviewer Observations to Improve Response Propensity Models
Can Marketing Data Aid Survey Research? Examining Accuracy and Completeness in Consumer-File Data
The welfare use of immigrants and natives in Germany
The Pass panel survey after six waves
Nonresponse and Measurement Error in Employment Research
Census Geocoding for Nonresponse Bias Evaluation in Telephone Surveys
Leverage-Saliency Theory of Survey Participation
Evaluating the Measurement Error of Interviewer Observed Paradata
| Unique citing works | 8 |
|---|---|
| Citations per year | 0,67 |
| Citation span | 2014 - 2021 (8) |
| Citation velocity | historical |
| Highly cited | No |
| Citation types | Neutral: 8 |