[Biemer, P.P. 1988. “Measuring Data Quality.” In Telephone Survey Methodology, edited by R.M. Groves, P.P. Biemer, L. Lyberg, J.T. Massey, W. II, Nicholls, and J. Waksberg, 341–375. New York: Wiley.]Search in Google Scholar
[Biemer, P.P. 2010. “Total Survey Error: Design, Implementation, and Evaluation.” Public Opinion Quarterly 74: 817–848. Doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/poq/nfq058.10.1093/poq/nfq058]Search in Google Scholar
[Biemer, P.P. and L.E. Lyberg. 2003. Introduction to Survey Quality. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.10.1002/0471458740]Search in Google Scholar
[Blumberg, S.J. and J.V. Luke. 2013. “Wireless Substitution: Early Release of Estimates from the National Health Interview Survey, July–December 2012.” National Center for Health Statistics. December. Available at: http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/nhis/earlyrelease/wireless201306.pdf (accessed March 2017).]Search in Google Scholar
[Brick, J.M. and D. Williams. 2013. “Explaining Rising Nonresponse Rates in Cross-Sectional Surveys.” The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science 645: 36–59. Doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0002716212456834.10.1177/0002716212456834]Search in Google Scholar
[Carley-Baxter, L.R., A. Peytchev, and M.C. Black. 2010. “Comparison of Cell Phone and Landline Surveys: A Design Perspective.” Field Methods 22(1): 3–15. Doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1525822X09360310.10.1177/1525822X09360310]Search in Google Scholar
[Chang, L. and J.A. Krosnick. 2009. “National surveys via RDD telephone interviewing versus the internet. Comparing sample representativeness and response quality.” Public Opinion Quarterly 73: 641–678. Doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/poq/nfp075.10.1093/poq/nfp075]Search in Google Scholar
[Couper, M.P. 2011. “The Future of Modes of Data Collection.” Public Opinion Quarterly 75(5): 889–908. Doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/poq/nfr046.10.1093/poq/nfr046]Search in Google Scholar
[De Leeuw, E. 2005. “To Mix or Not to Mix Data Collection Modes in Surveys.” Journal of Official Statistics 21: 233–255.]Search in Google Scholar
[De Leeuw, E.D. and N. Berzelak. 2017. “Survey mode or survey modes?” In The Sage Handbook of Survey Methodology, edited by C. Wolf, D. Joye, T.W. Smith, and Y.-C. Fu, 142–156. London: Sage Publications.10.4135/9781473957893.n11]Search in Google Scholar
[De Leeuw, E. and W. de Heer. 2002. “Trends in Household Survey Nonresponse: A Longitudinal and International Comparison.” In Survey nonresponse, edited by R. Groves, D. Dillman, J. Eltinge, and R.J.A. Little, 41–54. New York: Wiley.]Search in Google Scholar
[De Leeuw, E.D., J.J. Hox, and D.A. Dillman. 2008. “Mixed mode surveys: When and why.” In International Handbook of Survey Methodology, edited by E.D. de Leeuw, J.J. Hox, and D.A. Dillman, 299–316. New York/London: Erlbaum/Taylor & Francis.]Search in Google Scholar
[Dillman, D.A., G. Phelps, R. Tortora, K. Swift, J. Kohrell, J. Berck, and B.L. Messer. 2009. “Response Rate and Measurement Differences in Mixed-Mode Surveys using Mail, Telephone, Interactive Voice Response (IVR) and the Internet.” Social Science Research 38: 1–18. Doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ssresearch.2008.03.007.10.1016/j.ssresearch.2008.03.007]Search in Google Scholar
[Dillman, D.A., J.D. Smyth, and L.M. Christian. 2014. Internet, Phone, Mail, and Mixedmode Surveys: the Tailored Design Method (4th Edition). Hoboken: Wiley.]Search in Google Scholar
[Eva, G., G. Loosveldt, P. Lynn, P. Martin, M. Revilla, W. Saris, and J. Vannieuwenhuyze. 2010. Assessing the Cost-Effectiveness of Different Modes for ESS Data Collection. London: City University.]Search in Google Scholar
[Fowler, F.J., P.M. Gallagher, V.L. Stringfellow, A.M. Zaslavsky, J.W. Thompson, and P.D. Cleary. 2002. “Using Telephone Interviews to Reduce Nonresponse Bias to Mail Surveys of Health Plan Members.” Medical Care 40: 190–200.10.1097/00005650-200203000-0000311880792]Search in Google Scholar
[Gordoni, G., P. Schmidt, and Y. Gordoni. 2012. “Measurement invariance across face-to-face and telephone modes: the case of minority-status collectivistic oriented groups.” International Journal of Public Opinion Research 24(2): 185–207. Doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/ijpor/edq054.10.1093/ijpor/edq054]Search in Google Scholar
[Greene, J., H. Speizer, and W. Wiitala. 2008. “Telephone and Web: Mixed-Mode Challenge.” Health Services Research 43: 230–248. Doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1475-6773.2007.00747.x.10.1111/j.1475-6773.2007.00747.x232313918211527]Search in Google Scholar
[Groves, R.M. 1989. Survey Errors and Survey Costs. New York: Wiley.10.1002/0471725277]Search in Google Scholar
[Groves, R.M. 2006. “Nonresponse Rates and Nonresponse Bias in Household Surveys.” Public Opinion Quarterly 70: 646–675.10.1093/poq/nfl033]Search in Google Scholar
[Groves, R.M. 2011. “Three Eras of Survey Research.” Public Opinion Quarterly 75(5): 861–971. Doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/poq/nfl033.10.1093/poq/nfl033]Search in Google Scholar
[Groves, R.M., F.J. Fowler Jr., M.P. Couper, J.M. Lepkowski, E. Singer, and R. Tourangeau. 2009. Survey Methodology (Wiley Series in Survey Methods), 2nd Ed. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons.]Search in Google Scholar
[Groves, R.M. and L.J. Magilavy. 1984. “An Experimental Measurement of Total Survey Error.” In Proceedings of the Section on Survey Research Methods: American Statistical Association, 698–703. Alexandria, VA: American Statistical Association. Available at: http://ww2.amstat.org/sections/srms/Proceedings/ (accessed March 2017).]Search in Google Scholar
[Heerwegh, D. and G. Loosveldt. 2011. “Assessing mode effects in a national crime victimization survey using structural equation models: social desirability bias and acquiescence.” Journal of Official Statistics 27: 49–63.]Search in Google Scholar
[Hochstim, J.R. 1967. “A Critical Comparison of Three Strategies of Collecting Data from Households.” Journal of the American Statistical Association 62: 976–989. Doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/2283686.10.2307/2283686]Search in Google Scholar
[Holbrook, A., M. Green, and J. Krosnick. 2003. “Telephone Versus Face-to-face Interviewing of National Probability Samples with Long Questionnaires.” Public Opinion Quarterly 67: 79–125. Doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1086/346010.10.1086/346010]Search in Google Scholar
[Hox, J., E.D. de Leeuw, and T. Klausch. 2017. “Mixed mode research: Issues in design and analysis.” In Total Survey Error in Practice: Improving Quality in the Era of Big Data, edited by P.P. Biemer, E.D. de Leeuw, S. Eckman, B. Edwards, F. Kreuter, L.E. Lyberg, C. Tucker, and B.T. West, 511–530. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley and Sons, Inc.10.1002/9781119041702.ch23]Search in Google Scholar
[Hox, J.J., E.D. de Leeuw, and E.A.O. Zijlmans. 2015. “Measurement equivalence in mixed mode surveys.” Frontiers in Psychology: Quantitative Psychology and Measurement. Doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2015.00087.10.3389/fpsyg.2015.00087431828225699002]Search in Google Scholar
[Kappelhof, J.W.S. 2013. “The Effect of Different Survey Designs on Nonresponse in Surveys of Non-Western Minorities in The Netherlands.” Survey Research Methods 8(2): 81–98. Doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.18148/srm/2014.v8i2.5784.]Search in Google Scholar
[Klausch, L.T., J.J. Hox, and B. Schouten. 2013. “Measurement effects of survey mode on the equivalence of attitudinal rating scale questions.” Sociological Methods and Research 42: 227–263. Doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0049124113500480.10.1177/0049124113500480]Search in Google Scholar
[Klausch, T., J.J. Hox, and B. Schouten. 2015a. “Selection Error in Single- and Mixed Mode Surveys of the Dutch General Population.” Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series A 178: 945–961. Doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/rssa.12102.10.1111/rssa.12102]Search in Google Scholar
[Klausch, T., B. Schouten, and J.J. Hox. 2014. “The Use of Within-subject Experiments for Estimating Measurement Effects in Mixed-mode Surveys.” Statistics Netherlands Discussion Paper, 2015/06. Available at: https://www.cbs.nl/en-gb/background/2014/11/the-use-of-within-subject-experiments-for-estimating-measurement-effects-in-mixed-mode-surveys (accessed March 2017).]Search in Google Scholar
[Klausch, T., B. Schouten, and J.J. Hox. 2015b. “Evaluating Bias of Sequential Mixedmode Designs Against Benchmark Surveys.” Sociological Methods and Research 1–34. Doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0049124115585362.10.1177/0049124115585362]Search in Google Scholar
[Kreuter, F., S. Presser, and R. Tourangeau. 2008. “Social Desirability Bias in CATI, IVR, and Web Surveys: The Effects of Mode and Question Sensitivity.” Public Opinion Quarterly 72: 847–865. Doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/poq/nfn063.10.1093/poq/nfn063]Search in Google Scholar
[Kreuter, F., G. Müller, and M. Trappmann. 2010. “Nonresponse and Measurement Error in Employment Research: Making Use of Administrative Data.” Public Opinion Quarterly 74: 880–906. Doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/poq/nfq0.10.1093/poq/nfq060]Search in Google Scholar
[Link, M.W. and A.H. Mokdad. 2006. “Can Web and Mail Survey Modes Improve Participation in an RDD-Based National Health Surveillance?” Journal of Official Statistics 22: 293–312.]Search in Google Scholar
[Lipps, O., N. Pekari, and C. Roberts. 2015. “Undercoverage and Nonresponse in a List-Sampled Telephone Election Study.” Survey Research Methods 9(2): 71–82. Doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.18148/srm/2015.v9i2.6139.]Search in Google Scholar
[Lynn, P. 2013. “Alternative Sequential Mixed-Mode Designs: Effects on Attrition Rates, Attrition Bias, and Costs.” Journal of Survey Statistics and Methodology 1: 183–205. Doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/jssam/smt015.10.1093/jssam/smt015]Search in Google Scholar
[Massey, D.S. and R. Tourangeau. 2013. “Where Do We Go from Here? Nonresponse and Social Measurement.” The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science 645(1): 222–236. Doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0002716212464191.10.1177/0002716212464191425747725484368]Search in Google Scholar
[Millar, M.M. and D.A. Dillman. 2011. “Improving Response to Web and Mixed-Mode Surveys.” Public Opinion Quarterly 75(2): 249–269. Doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/poq/nfr003.10.1093/poq/nfr003]Search in Google Scholar
[Olson, K. 2006. “Survey Participation, Nonresponse Bias, Measurement Error Bias, and Total Bias.” Public Opinion Quarterly 70(5): 737–758. Doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/poq/nfl038.10.1093/poq/nfl038]Search in Google Scholar
[Olson, K., J.D. Smyth, and H. Wood. 2012. “Does Providing Sample Members with Their Preferred Survey Mode Really Increase Participation Rates?” Public Opinion Quarterly 76(4): 611–635. Doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/poq/nfs024.10.1093/poq/nfs024]Search in Google Scholar
[Peytchev, A., R.K. Baxter, and L.R. Carley-Baxter. 2009. “Not All Survey Effort is Equal. Reduction of Nonresponse Bias and Nonresponse Error.” Public Opinion Quarterly 73(4): 785–806. Doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/poq/nfp037.10.1093/poq/nfp037]Search in Google Scholar
[Peytcheva, E. and R.M. Groves. 2009. “Using Variation in Response Rates of Demographic Subgroups as Evidence of Nonresponse Bias in Survey Estimates.” Journal of Official Statistics 25(2): 193–201.]Search in Google Scholar
[Rao, J.N.K. and A.J. Scott. 1987. “On simple adjustments to chi-square tests with sample survey data.” The Annals of Statistics 15(1): 385–397. Doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1214/aos/1176348654.10.1214/aos/1176348654]Search in Google Scholar
[Roberts, C., D. Joye, M. Ernst Stähli, and R. Sanchez Tome. 2016. Mixing modes of data collection in Swiss social surveys: Methodological Report of the LIVES-FORS Mixed Mode Experiment. LIVES Working Paper Series, 2016/48. Doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.12682/lives.2296-1658.2016.48.]Search in Google Scholar
[Sakshaug, J.W., T. Yan, and R. Tourangeau. 2010. “Nonresponse Error, Measurement Error, and Mode of Data Collection: Tradeoffs in a Multi-mode Survey of Sensitive and Non-sensitive Items.” Public Opinion Quarterly 74(5): 907–933. Doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/poq/nfq057.10.1093/poq/nfq057]Search in Google Scholar
[Schouten, B., J. van den Brakel, B. Buelens, J. van der Laan, and T. Klausch. 2013. “Disentangling Mode-Specific Selection and Measurement Bias in Social Surveys.” Social Science Research 42(6): 1555–1570. Doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ssresearch.2013.07.005.10.1016/j.ssresearch.2013.07.00524090851]Search in Google Scholar
[Siemiatycki, J. 1979. “A Comparison of Mail, Telephone, and Home Interview Strategies for Household Health Surveys.” American Journal of Public Health 69: 238–245.10.2105/AJPH.69.3.238]Search in Google Scholar
[Smith, T.W. 2011. “Refining the Total Survey Error Perspective.” International Journal of Public Opinion Research 23(4): 464–484. Doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/ijpor/edq052.10.1093/ijpor/edq052]Search in Google Scholar
[Suzer-Gurtekin, Z., S. Heeringa, and R. Vaillant. 2012. “Investigating the Bias of Alternative Statistical Inference Methods in Sequential Mixed-mode Surveys.” Proceedings of the JSM, Section on Survey Research Methods 4711-2. Available at: https://www.niss.org/sites/default/files/VII%201%20Suzer-Gurtekin_itsew2013.pdf (accessed April 2016).]Search in Google Scholar
[Tourangeau, R. 2017. “Mixing modes: Tradeoffs among coverage, nonresponse, and measurement error.” In Total Survey Error in Practice: Improving Quality in the Era of Big Data, edited by P.P. Biemer, E.D. de Leeuw, S. Eckman, B. Edwards, F. Kreuter, L.E. Lyberg, C. Tucker, and B.T. West. 115–132. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley and Sons, Inc.10.1002/9781119041702.ch6]Search in Google Scholar
[Tourangeau, R., R.M. Groves, and C.D. Redline. 2010. “Sensitive topics and reluctant respondents: Demonstrating a link between nonresponse bias and measurement error.” Public Opinion Quarterly 74(3): 413–432. Doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/poq/nfq004.10.1093/poq/nfq004]Search in Google Scholar
[Vannieuwenhuyze, J.T.A., G. Loosveldt, and G. Molenberghs. 2010. “A Method for Evaluating Mode Effects in Mixed-mode Surveys.” Public Opinion Quarterly 74: 1027–1045. Doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/poq/nfq059.10.1093/poq/nfq059]Search in Google Scholar
[Vannieuwenhuyze, J.T.A. 2014. “On the Relative Advantage of Mixed-Mode versus Single-Mode Surveys.” Survey Research Methods 8(1): 31–42. Doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.18148/srm/2014.v8i1.5500#sthash.xSmtK1fH.dpuf.]Search in Google Scholar
[Vannieuwenhuyze, J.T.A. and G. Loosveldt. 2012. “Evaluating Relative Mode Effects in Mixed-mode Surveys: Three Methods to Disentangle Selection and Measurement Effects.” Sociological Methods and Research 42: 82–104. Doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0049124112464868.10.1177/0049124112464868]Search in Google Scholar
[Wagner, J., J. Arrieta, H. Guyer, and M.B. Ofstedal. 2014. “Does Sequence Matter in Multimode Surveys: Results from an Experiment.” Field Methods 26(2): 141–155. Doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1525822X13491863.10.1177/1525822X13491863399248024764767]Search in Google Scholar