[Bates, N., J. Dahlhamer, P. Phipps, A. Safir, and L. Tan. 2010. “Assessing Contact History Paradata Quality Across Several Federal Surveys.” In JSM Proceedings, Survey Research Methods Section, American Statistical Association, Vancouver, BC, July 31-August 5, 2010. Alexandria, VA: American Statistical Association. 91–105. Available at: http://ww2.amstat.org/sections/SRMS/Proceedings/y2010/Files/306005_55654.pdf (accessed February 2017).]Search in Google Scholar
[Bates, N., J. Dahlhamer, and E. Singer. 2008. “Privacy Concerns, Too Busy, or Just Not Interested: Using Doorstep Concerns to Predict Survey Nonresponse.” Journal of Official Statistics 24: 591–612.]Search in Google Scholar
[Biemer, P.P., P. Chen, and K. Wang. 2013. “Using Level-of-Effort Paradata in Non-Response Adjustments with Application to Field Surveys.” Journal of the Royal Statistical Society: Series A 176: 147–168. Doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-985X.2012.01058.x.10.1111/j.1467-985X.2012.01058.x]Open DOISearch in Google Scholar
[Bothwell, L. and S. Podolsky. 2016. “The Emergence of the Randomized, Controlled Trial.” New England Journal of Medicine 375: 501–504. Doi http://dx.doi.org/10.1056/NEJMp1604635.10.1056/NEJMp160463527509097]Open DOISearch in Google Scholar
[Bradburn, N. 1978. “Respondent Burden.” In JSM Proceedings, Survey Research Methods Section, American Statistical Association, San Diego, California, August 14–17, 1978. Alexandria, VA: American Statistical Association. 35–40. Available at: http://ww2.amstat.org/sections/SRMS/Proceedings/papers/1978_007.pdf (accessed February 2017).]Search in Google Scholar
[U.S. Census Bureau. 2014. Design and Methodology: American Community Survey. Washington, DC: U.S. Census Bureau. Available at: https://www.census.gov/programs-surveys/acs/methodology/design-and-methodology.html (accessed February 2017).]Search in Google Scholar
[Dyer, W. 2004. “Contact History Instrument.” In IBUC Proceedings, International Blaise Users Conference, Qubec, Canada, September 22–24, 2004. International Blaise Users Group. 35–61. Available at: www.blaiseusers.org/2004/papers/03.pdf (accessed February 2017).]Search in Google Scholar
[Ferguson, T. 1967. Mathematical Statistics: A Decision Theoretic Approach. Academic Press.]Search in Google Scholar
[Fricker, S., T. Yan, and S. Tsai. 2014. “Response Burden: What Predicts It and Who is Burdened Out?” In AAPOR Proceedings, American Association for Public Opinion Research, Anaheim, California, May 15–18, 2014. Oakbrook Terrace, IL: American Association for Public Opinion Research. 4568–4577. Available at: https://www.bls.gov/osmr/pdf/st140170.pdf (accessed February 2017).]Search in Google Scholar
[Griffin, D. 2013. “Effect of Changing Call Parameters in the American Community Survey’s Computer Assisted Telephone Interviewing Operation.” American Community Survey Research and Evaluation Report Memorandum Series ACS13-RER-17. Washington, DC: U.S. Census Bureau. Available at: https://www.census.gov/content/dam/Census/library/working-papers/2013/acs/2013_Griffin_03.pdf (accessed February 2017).]Search in Google Scholar
[Griffin, D. 2014. “Reducing Respondent Burden in the American Community Survey’s Computer Assisted Personal Visit Interviewing Operation – Phase 2 Results.” American Community Survey Research and Evaluation Report Memorandum Series ACS14-RER-07. Washington, DC: U.S. Census Bureau. Available at: https://www.census.gov/content/dam/Census/library/working-papers/2014/acs/2014_Griffin_01.pdf (accessed February 2017).]Search in Google Scholar
[Griffin, D. and T. Hughes. 2013. “Analysis of Alternative Call Parameters in the American Community Survey’s Computer Assisted Telephone Interviewing.” American Community Survey Research and Evaluation Report Memorandum Series ACS13-RER-11. Washington, DC: U.S. Census Bureau. Available at: https://www.census.gov/content/dam/Census/library/working-papers/2013/acs/2013_Griffin_02.pdf (accessed February 2017).]Search in Google Scholar
[Griffin, D. and D. Nelson. 2014. “Reducing Respondent Burden in the American Community Survey’s Computer Assisted Personal Visit Interviewing Operation – Phase 1 Results (Part 2).” American Community Survey Research and Evaluation Report Memorandum Series ACS14-RER-22. Washington, DC: U.S. Census Bureau. Available at: https://www.census.gov/content/dam/Census/library/working-papers/2014/acs/2014_Griffin_02.pdf (accessed February 2017).]Search in Google Scholar
[Griffin, D., E. Slud, and C. Erdman. 2015. “Reducing Respondent Burden in the American Community Survey’s Computer Assisted Personal Visit Interviewing Operations – Phase 3 Results.” American Community Survey Research and Evaluation Report Memorandum Series ACS14-RER-28-R1. Washington, DC: U.S. Census Bureau. Available at: https://www.census.gov/content/dam/Census/library/working-papers/2015/acs/2015_Griffin_01.pdf (accessed February 2017).]Search in Google Scholar
[Groves, R. and S. Heeringa. 2006. “Responsive Design for Household Surveys: Tools for Actively Controlling Survey Errors and Costs.” Journal of the Royal Statistics Society: Series A 169: 439–457. Doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-985X.2006.00423.x.10.1111/j.1467-985X.2006.00423.x]Open DOISearch in Google Scholar
[Groves, R.M., J. Wagner, and E. Peytcheva. 2007. “Use of Interviewer Judgments about Attributes of Selected Respondents in Post-Survey Adjustment for Unit Nonresponse: An Illustration with the National Survey of Family Growth.” In JSM Proceedings, Survey Research Methods Section, American Statistical Association, Salt Lake City, Utah, July 29-August 2, 2007. Alexandria, VA: American Statistical Association. 3428–3431. Available at: http://ww2.amstat.org/sections/SRMS/Proceedings/y2007/Files/JSM2007-000782.pdf (accessed February 2017).]Search in Google Scholar
[Hedlin, D., Dale, T., Haraldsen, G., and Jones, J. eds. 2005. Developing Methods for Assessing Perceived Response Burden. Research Report. Stockholm: Statistics Sweden, Oslo: Statistics Norway, and London: Office for National Statistics. Available at: http://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/documents/64157/4374310/10-DEVELOPING-METHODS-FOR-ASSESSING-PERCEIVED-RESPONSE-BURDEN.pdf/1900efc8-1a07-4482-b3c9-be88ee71df3b (accessed February 2017).]Search in Google Scholar
[Hughes, T., E. Slud, R. Ashmead, and R. Walsh. 2016. “Results of a Field Pilot to Reduce Respondent Contact Burden in the American Community Survey’s Computer Assisted Personal Interviewing Operation.” American Community Survey Research and Evaluation Report Memorandum Series #ACS16-RER-07. Washington, DC: U.S. Census Bureau. Available at: https://www.census.gov/content/dam/Census/library/working-papers/2016/acs/2016_Hughes_01.pdf (accessed February 2017).]Search in Google Scholar
[Klein, J. and M. Moeschberger. 2003. Survival Analysis: Techniques for Censored and Truncated Data, 2nd ed. Springer-Verlag.10.1007/b97377]Search in Google Scholar
[Kreuter, F., K. Olson, K.J. Wagner, T. Yan, T. Ezzati-Rice, C. Casas-Cordero, M. Lemay, A. Peytchev, R. Groves, and T. Raghunathan. 2010. “Using Proxy Measures and Other Correlates of Survey Outcomes to Adjust for Non-response: Examples from Multiple Surveys.” Journal of the Royal Statistical Society: Series A 173: 389–407. Doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-985X.2009.00621.x.10.1111/j.1467-985X.2009.00621.x]Open DOISearch in Google Scholar
[Luiten, A. and B. Schouten. 2013. “Tailored Fieldwork Design to Increase Representative Household Survey Response: An Experiment in the Survey of Consumer Satisfaction.” Journal of the Royal Statistical Society: Series A 176: 169–189. Doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-985X.2012.01080.x.10.1111/j.1467-985X.2012.01080.x]Open DOISearch in Google Scholar
[Maitland, A., C. Casas-Cordero, and F. Kreuter. 2009. “An Evaluation of Nonresponse Bias using Paradata from a Health Survey.” In JSM Proceedings, Survey Research Methods Section, American Statistical Association, Washington, DC, August 1–6, 2009. Alexandria, VA: American Statistical Association. 370–378. Available at: http://ww2.amstat.org/sections/SRMS/Proceedings/y2009/Files/303004.pdf (accessed February 2017).]Search in Google Scholar
[Mills, G. 2016. “Simulated Effects of Changing Calling Parameters and Workload Size on Computer Assisted Telephone Interview Productivity in the American Community Survey.” American Community Survey Research and Evaluation Report Memorandum Series #ACS16-RER-22. Washington, DC: U.S. Census Bureau. Available at: https://census.gov/content/dam/Census/library/working-papers/2016/acs/2016_Mills_02.pdf (accessed August 2017).]Search in Google Scholar
[Olson, K. and R. Groves. 2012. “An Examination of Within-Person Variation in Response Propensity over the Data Collection Field Period.” Journal of Official Statistics 28: 29–51.]Search in Google Scholar
[Schouten, B., F. Cobben, and J. Bethlehem. 2009. “Indicators for the Representativeness of Survey Response.” Survey Methodology 35: 101–113.]Search in Google Scholar
[Sharp, L. and J. Frankel. 1983. “Respondent Burden: A Test of Some Common Assumptions.” Public Opinion Quarterly 47: 36–53. Doi: https://doi.org/10.1086/268765.10.1086/268765]Open DOISearch in Google Scholar
[Slud, E. 1998. “Predictive Models for Decennial Census Household Response.” In JSM Proceedings, Survey Research Methods Section, American Statistical Association, Dallas, Texas, August 9–13, 1998. Alexandria, VA: American Statistical Association. 272–277. Available at: http://ww2.amstat.org/sections/SRMS/Proceedings/papers/1998_043.pdf (accessed February 2017).]Search in Google Scholar
[Slud, E. 1999. “Analysis of 1990 Decennial Census Checkin-Time Data.” In FCSM Proceedings Federal Committee on Statistical Methodology, Washington, DC, November 15–17, 1999. Available at: https://s3.amazonaws.com/sitesusa/wp-content/uploads/sites/242/2014/05/IX-B_Slud_FCSM1999.pdf (accessed August 2017).]Search in Google Scholar
[Slud, E. and C. Erdman. 2013. “Adaptive Curtailment of Survey Follow-up Based on Contact History Data.” In FCSM Proceedings Federal Committee on Statistical Methodology, Washington, DC, November 4–6, 2013. 1–11. Available at: https://s3.amazonaws.com/sitesusa/wpcontent/uploads/sites/242/2014/05/B1_Slud_2013 FCSM.pdf (accessed August 2017).]Search in Google Scholar
[Virgile, M. 2015. “Measurement Error in American Community Survey Paradata and 2014 Redesign of the Contact History Instrument.” Center for Statistical Research and Methodology Report Series (Survey Methodology #RSM2016-01). Washington, DC: U.S. Census Bureau. Available at: https://www.census.gov/srd/papers/pdf/RSM2016-01.pdf (accessed February 2017).]Search in Google Scholar
[Wagner, J. and T. Raghunathan. 2010. “A New Stopping Rule for Surveys.” Statistics in Medicine 29: 1014–1024. Doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/sim.3834.10.1002/sim.383420131311]Open DOISearch in Google Scholar
[Zelenak, M.F. and M. Davis. 2013. “Impact of Multiple Contacts by Computer-Assisted Telephone Interview and Computer-Assisted Personal Interview on Final Interview Outcome in the American Community Survey.” American Community Survey Research and Evaluation Report Memorandum Series #ACS13-RER-08. Washington, DC: U.S. Census Bureau. Available at: www.census.gov/content/dam/Census/library/working-papers/2013/acs/2013_Zelenak_01.pdf (accessed February 2017).]Search in Google Scholar
[Zelenak, M.F. 2014. “Reducing Respondent Burden in the American Community Survey’s Computer Assisted Personal Visit Interviewing Operation – Phase 1 Results (Part 1).” American Community Survey Research and Evaluation Report Memorandum Series #ACS14-RER-06. Washington, DC: U.S. Census Bureau. Available at: https://www.census.gov/content/dam/Census/library/working-papers/2014/acs/2014_Zelenak_01.pdf (accessed February 2017).]Search in Google Scholar
