Comparing Two Inferential Approaches to Handling Measurement Error in Mixed-Mode Surveys

Buelens, B. and J.A. Van den Brakel. 2015. “Measurement Error Calibration in Mixed-Mode Sample Surveys.” Sociological Methods & Research 44(3): 391–426. Doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0049124114532444.10.1177/0049124114532444Search in Google Scholar

Cannel, C., P. Miller, and L. Oksenberg. 1981. “Research on Interviewing Techniques.” In Sociological Methodology, edited by S. Leinhardt. 389–437. San Fransisco: Jossey-Bass.10.2307/270748Search in Google Scholar

Centraal Bureau voor de Statistiek. 2015. Methoden en Definties Enquête Beroepsbevolking 2014. Technical report, Statistics Nederlands, Heerlen. Available at: https://www.cbs.nl/NR/rdonlyres/1BB3C645-47CC-4F58-9031-89F490AEE981/0/methodenendefinitiesebb2014.pdf (accessed March 2017).Search in Google Scholar

Cernat, A. 2015. “Impact of Mode Design on Measurement Errors and Estimates of Individual Change.” Survey Research Methods 9(2): 83–99. Doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.18148/srm/2015.v9i2.5851.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

Dillman, D., G. Phelps, R. Tortora, K. Swift, J. Kohrell, J. Berck, and B. Messer. 2009. “Response Rate and Measurement Differences in Mixed-Mode Surveys Using Mail, Telephone, Interactive Voice Response and the Internet.” Social Science Research 39: 1–18. Doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ssresearch.2008.03.007.10.1016/j.ssresearch.2008.03.007Search in Google Scholar

Groves R.M. and L. Lyberg. 2010. “Total Survey Error: Past, Present, and Future.” Public Opinion Quarterly 74(5): 849–879. Doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/poq/nfq065.10.1093/poq/nfq065Search 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/10.1086/346010.10.1086/346010Search in Google Scholar

Jäckle, A., C. Roberts, and P. Lynn. 2010. “Assessing the Effect of Data Collection Mode on Measurement.” International Statistical Review 78: 3–20. Doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1751-5823.2010.00102.x.10.1111/j.1751-5823.2010.00102.xSearch in Google Scholar

Klausch, T., J. Hox, and B. Schouten. 2015. “Selection Error in Single- and Mixed Mode Surveys of the Dutch General Population.” Journal of the Royal Statistical Society: Series A (Statistics in Society) 178(4): 945–961. Doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/rssa.12102.10.1111/rssa.12102Search in Google Scholar

Krosnick, J. 1991. “Response strategies for Coping with the Cognitive Demands of Attitude Measures in Surveys.” Applied Cognitive Psychology 5: 213–236. Doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/acp.2350050305.10.1002/acp.2350050305Search in Google Scholar

Krosnick, J. and D. Alwin. 1987. “An Evaluation of a Cognitive Theory of Response-Order Effects in Survey Measurement.” Public Opinion Quarterly 51: 201–219. Doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1086/269029.10.1086/269029Search 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(2): 183–205. Doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/jssam/smt015.10.1093/jssam/smt015Search in Google Scholar

Särndal, C.-E., B. Swensson, and J. Wretman. 1992. Model Assisted Survey Sampling. New York: Springer-Verlag.10.1007/978-1-4612-4378-6Search 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.2013.07.00524090851Search in Google Scholar

Suzer-Gurtekin, Z.T. 2013. Investigating the Bias Properties of Alternative Statistical Inference Methods in Mixed-Mode Surveys. Ph.D. thesis, University of Michigan. Available at: https://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/handle/2027.42/102471/tsuzer_1.pdf (accessed March 2017).Search in Google Scholar

Suzer-Gurtekin, Z.T., S. Heeringa, and R. Vaillant. 2012. “Investigating the Bias of Alternative Statistical Inference Methods in Sequential Mixed-Mode Surveys.” In Proceedings of the JSM, Section on Survey Research Methods, San Diego, July 28–August 2, 2012. American Statistical Association, 4711–25.Search in Google Scholar

Tourangeau, R., L. Rips, and K. Rasinski. 2000. The Psychology of Survey Response. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9780511819322Search in Google Scholar

Van den Brakel, J. 2008. “Design-Based Analysis of Embedded Experiments with Applications in the Dutch Labour Force Survey.” Journal of the Royal Statistical Society, Series A 171: 581–613. Doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-985X.2008.00532.x.10.1111/j.1467-985X.2008.00532.xSearch in Google Scholar

Van den Brakel, J.A. and S. Krieg. 2015. “Dealing with Small Sample Sizes, Rotation Group Bias and Discontinuities in a Rotating Panel Design.” Survey Methodology 41(2): 267–296. Available at: http://www.statcan.gc.ca/pub/12-001-x/2015002/article/14231-eng.pdf (accessed March 2017).Search in Google Scholar

Vannieuwenhuyze, J.T.A. and G. Loosveldt. 2013. “Evaluating Relative Mode Effects in Mixed-Mode Surveys: Three Methods to Disentangle Selection and Measurement Effects.” Sociological Methods & Research 42(1): 82–104. Doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0049124112464868.10.1177/0049124112464868Search in Google Scholar

Voogt, R. and W. Saris. 2005. “Mixed Mode Designs: Finding the Balance Between Nonresponse Bias and Mode Effects.” Journal of Official Statistics 21: 367–387.Search in Google Scholar