[Aggarwal, V.A., and D.H. Hsu. 2013. “Entrepreneurial exits and innovation.” Management Science, 60(4): 867–887. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.2013.1801.10.1287/mnsc.2013.1801]Search in Google Scholar
[Athey, S., and G.W. Imbens. 2017. “The state of applied econometrics: Causality and policy evaluation.” Journal of Economic Perspectives, 31(2): 3–32. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1257/jep.31.2.3.10.1257/jep.31.2.3]Search in Google Scholar
[Azur, M.J., E.A. Stuart, C. Frangakis, and P.J. Leaf. 2011. “Multiple imputation by chained equations: What is it and how does it work?” International Journal of Methods in Psychiatric Research, 20(1): 40–49. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/mpr.329.10.1002/mpr.329307424121499542]Search in Google Scholar
[Bell, J., Huber, J., and W.K. Viscusi. 2011. “Survey mode effects on valuation of environmental goods.” International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 8(4): 1222–1243. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph8041222.10.3390/ijerph8041222311888621695037]Search in Google Scholar
[Bianchi, A., Biffgnandi, S., and P. Lynn. 2017. “Web-face-to-face mixed-mode design in a longitudinal survey: Effects on participation rates, sample composition, and costs.” Journal of Official Statistics, 33(2): 385–408. DOI: 10.1515/jos-2017-0019.10.1515/jos-2017-0019]Search in Google Scholar
[Blackwell, M., S. Iacus, G. King, and G. Porro. 2009. “CEM: Coarsened Exact Matching in Stata.” The Stata Journal, 9: 524–546. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/1536867X0900900402.10.1177/1536867X0900900402]Search in Google Scholar
[Blanke, K., and A. Luiten. 2014. Query on Data Collection for Social Surveys. ESSnet Project “Data Collection for Social Surveys using Multiple Modes”. Available at: http://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/cros/system/files/Query_report_DCSS.pdf_en (accessed October 2019).]Search in Google Scholar
[Bos, J.T., N.C.G.M. Donders, K.M. Bouwman-Brouwer, and J.W.J.V. der Gulden. 2009. “Work characteristics and determinants of job satisfaction in four age groups: university employees’ point of view.” International Archives of Occupational and Environmental Health, 82(10): 1249–1259. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00420-009-0451-4.10.1007/s00420-009-0451-4276751819621236]Search in Google Scholar
[Breiman, L. 2001. “Random Forests”. Machine Learning, 45(1): 5 – 32. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1010933404324.10.1023/A:1010933404324]Search in Google Scholar
[Breiman, L., A. Cutler, A. Liaw, and M. Wiener. 2018. Package randomForest. Available at: https://cran.r-project.org/web/packages/randomForest/randomForest.pdf (accessed February 2021).]Search in Google Scholar
[Brookhart, M.A., S. Schneeweiss, K.J. Rothman, R.J. Glynn, J. Avorn, and T. Stärmer. 2006. “Variable selection for propensity score models.” American Journal of Epidemiology, 163(12): 1149–1156. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/aje/kwj149.10.1093/aje/kwj149151319216624967]Search in Google Scholar
[Buelens, B., and J.A. van den Brakel. 2015. “Measurement Error Calibration in Mixed-mode Sample Surveys.” Sociological Methods and Research, 44(3): 391–426. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0049124114532444.10.1177/0049124114532444]Search in Google Scholar
[Couper, M.P. 2011. “The Future of Modes of Data Collection.” Public Opinion Quarterly (5): 889–908. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/poq/nfr046.10.1093/poq/nfr046]Search in Google Scholar
[De Leeuw, E.D. 2005. “To Mix or Not to Mix Data Collection Modes in Surveys.” Journal of Official Statistics, 21(2): 233–255. Available at: https://www.scb.se/contentassets/ca21efb41fee47d293bbee5bf7be7fb3/to-mix-or-not-to-mix-data-collection-modes-in-surveys.pdf. (accessed December 2020).]Search in Google Scholar
[De Leeuw, E.D. 2018. “Mixed-mode: Past, present, and future.” Survey Research Methods, 12(2): 75–89. DOI: https://doi.org/10.18148/srm/2018.vl2i2.7402.]Search in Google Scholar
[Dillman, D.A. 2017. “The promise and challenge of pushing respondents to the web in mixed-mode surveys.” Survey Methodology, 43(1): 3–30. Available at: http://www.statcan.gc.ca/pub/12-001-x/2017001/article/14836-eng.htm (accessed February 2021).]Search in Google Scholar
[Dillman, D.A., and L.M. Christian. 2005. “Survey Mode as a Source of Instability in Responses across Surveys.” Field Methods, 17(1): 30 – 52. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/1525822X04269550.10.1177/1525822X04269550]Search in Google Scholar
[Editus Luxembourg. 2018. Available at: https://www.editus.lu/]Search in Google Scholar
[Eurostat. 2018a. Eu labour force survey – methodology. Available at: https://ec.-europa.eu/eurostat/statistics-explained/index.php/EU_labour_force_survey_-_methodology (Accessed February 2021).]Search in Google Scholar
[Eurostat. 2018b. High-tech industry and knowledge-intensive services. Available at: https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/cache/metadata/en/htec_esms.htm (Accessed February 2021).]Search in Google Scholar
[Fan, W., and Z. Yan. 2010. “Factors affecting response rates of the web survey: A systematic review.” Computers in Human Behavior (2): 132–139. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2009.10.015.10.1016/j.chb.2009.10.015]Search in Google Scholar
[Felderer, B., A. Kirchner, and F. Kreuter. 2019. “The Effect of Survey Mode on Data Quality: Disentangling Nonresponse and Measurement Error Bias.” Journal of Official Statistics, 35(1): 93–115. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2478/jos-2019-0005.10.2478/jos-2019-0005]Search in Google Scholar
[Fricker, S., M. Galesic, R. Tourangeau, and T. Yan. 2005. “An experimental comparison of web and telephone surveys.” Public Opinion Quarterly, 69(3): 370–392. Available at. https://academic.oup.com/poq/article-abstract/69/3/370/1941667?redirectedFrom=-fulltext (accessed February 2021).10.1093/poq/nfi027]Search in Google Scholar
[Garrouste, C.L., and M. Rodrigues. 2014. “Employability of young graduates in Europe.” Journal of Manpower, 35(4): 425–447. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1108/IJM-05-2013-0106.10.1108/IJM-05-2013-0106]Search in Google Scholar
[Grande, E.D., and A.W. Taylor. 2010. “Sampling and coverage issues of telephone surveys used for collecting health information in Australia: results from a face-to-face survey from 1999 to 2008.” BMC Medical Research Methodology, 77(10). DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2288-10-77.10.1186/1471-2288-10-77294289420738884]Search in Google Scholar
[Greene, J., Speizer, H., and W. Wiitala. 2008. “Telephone and web: Mixed-mode challenge.” Health Services Research, 43(l Pl): 230–248. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.l475-6773.2007.00747.x.]Search in Google Scholar
[Groves, R.M. 2005. Survey errors and survey costs, (2nd ed.). Hoboken, New Jersey: John Wiley & Sons.]Search in Google Scholar
[Helppie-McFall, B., and J.W. Hsu. 2017. “A test of web and mail mode effects in a financially sensitive survey of older Americans.” Journal of Economic and Social Measurement, 42(2): 151–169. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3233/JEM-170444.10.3233/JEM-170444597624829861541]Search in Google Scholar
[Iacus, S.M., G. King, and G. Porro. 2011. “Multivariate Matching Methods That Are Monotonic Imbalance Bounding.” Journal of the American Statistical Association, 106(493): 345–361. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1198/jasa.2011.tm09599.10.1198/jasa.2011.tm09599]Search in Google Scholar
[Iacus, S.M., G. King, and G. Porro. 2012. “Causal Inference without Balance Checking: Coarsened Exact Matching.” Political Analysis, 20(1): 1–24. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/pan/mpr013.10.1093/pan/mpr013]Search in Google Scholar
[Iacus, S.M., G. King, and G. Porro. 2018. Package cem. Available at: https://cran.r-project.org/web/packages/cem/cem.pdf (accessed February 2021).]Search in Google Scholar
[ICLS Resolution, 19th. 2013. Resolution concerning statistics of work, employment and labour underutilization. Available at: https://www.ilo.org/wcmsp5/groups/public/—dgreports/—stat/documents/normativeinstrument/wcms_230304.pdf (accessed February 2021).]Search in Google Scholar
[Imbens, G.W. 2004. “Nonparametric Estimation of Average Treatment Effects Under Exogeneity: A review.” The Review of Economics and Statistics, 86(1): 4–29. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1162/003465304323023651.10.1162/003465304323023651]Search in Google Scholar
[Körner, T., and A. Liersch. 2014. Case study on mode effects in the German Labour Force Survey. Deliverable for work package III of the ESSnet on Data Collection for Social Surveys Using Multiple Modes. Available at: http://www.cros-portal.eu/content/data-collection (accessed December 2014).]Search in Google Scholar
[Liaw, A., and M. Wiener. 2002. “Classification and Regression by randomForest.” R News, 2(3): 18–22. Available at: https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Andy_Liaw/publication/228451484_Classification_and_Regression_by_RandomForest/links/53fb24cc0cf20a45497047ab/Classification-and-Regression-by-RandomForest.pdf (accessed February 2021).]Search in Google Scholar
[Lipps, O., N. Pekari, and C. Roberts. 2013. Coverage and nonresponse errors in an individual register frame based Swiss telephone election study. FORS. Available at: https://serval.unil.ch/resource/serval:BIB_7865820E3A4F.P001/REF.pdf (accessed February 2021).]Search in Google Scholar
[Long, J.S., and J. Freese. 2006. Regression models for categorical dependent variables using Stata, (2nd edition). Stata press.]Search in Google Scholar
[Lugtig, P., G.J.L.M. Lensvelt-Mulders, R. Frerichs, and A. Greven. 2011. “Estimating Nonresponse Bias and Mode Effects in a Mixed-Mode Survey.” International Journal of Market Research, 53(5): 1–16. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2501/IJMR-53-5-669-686.10.2501/IJMR-53-5-669-686]Search in Google Scholar
[Luiten, A., and K. Blanke. 2015. “Conclusions of the ESSnet – DCSS on web and mixed mode data collection in official social surveys.” Conference of New Techniques and Technologies for Statistics (NTTS 9–13 March 2015. Brussels, Belgium. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2901/EUROSTAT.C2015.001.]Search in Google Scholar
[Manfreda, L.K., M. Bosnjak, J. Berzelak, I. Haas, and V. Vehovar. 2008. “Web Surveys versus other Survey Modes: a Meta-Analysis Comparing Response Rates.” International Journal of Market Research, 50(1): 79–104. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/147078530805000107.10.1177/147078530805000107]Search in Google Scholar
[Mathur, M.B., P. Ding, and T.J. VanderWeele. 2018. Package EValue. Available at: https://cran.r-project.org/web/packages/EValue/EValue.pdf (accessed February 2021).]Search in Google Scholar
[Meinfelder, F. 2014. “Multiple Imputation: An attempt to retell the evolutionary process.” AStA Wirtschafts- und Sozialstatistisches Archiv, 8(4): 249 – 267. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/S11943-014-0151-8.10.1007/s11943-014-0151-8]Search in Google Scholar
[Mercer, A.W., F. Kreuter, S. Keeter, and E.A. Stuart. 2017. “Theory and Practice in Nonprobability Surveys: Parallels between Causal Inference and Survey Inference.” Public Opinion Quarterly, 81: 250–279. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/poq/nfw060.10.1093/poq/nfw060]Search in Google Scholar
[Morgan, S.L., and C. Winship. 2007. Counterfactuals and Causal Inference: Methods and Principles for Social Research. Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9780511804564]Search in Google Scholar
[Morris, T.P., I.R. White, and P. Royston. 2014. “Tuning multiple imputation by predictive mean matching and local residual draws.” BMC Medical Research Methodology, 14. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2288-14-75.10.1186/1471-2288-14-75405196424903709]Search in Google Scholar
[Pohjanpää, K. 2014. The report of web pilot study of LFS (WPIII). Statistics Finland. The ESSnet project on Data Collection for Social Surveys using Multiple Modes. 5 September, 2014, Wiesbaden, Germany. Available at: https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/cros/content/workshop-%E2%80%9Cdata-collection-social-surveys-using-multiple-modes%E2%80%9D-dcss_en (accessed October 2019).]Search in Google Scholar
[Riillo, C.A.F. 2017. Beyond the question “Does it pay to be green?”: How much green? and when?” Journal of Cleaner Production, 141: 626–640. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2016.09.039.10.1016/j.jclepro.2016.09.039]Search in Google Scholar
[Roberts, C., and C. Vandenplas. 2017. “Estimating Components of Mean Squared Error to Evaluate the Benefits of Mixing Data Collection Modes.” Journal of Official Statistics, 33(2): 303–334. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/jos-2017-0016.10.1515/jos-2017-0016]Search in Google Scholar
[Rosenbaum, P.R. 2005. “Sensitivity Analysis in Observational Studies.” In Encyclopedia of Statistics in Behavioral Science, edited by B.S. Everitt and D.C. Howell, 1451–1462. John Wiley & Sons, Ltd, Chichester.10.1002/0470013192.bsa606]Search in Google Scholar
[Rosenbaum, P.R., and D.B. Rubin. 1983. “The central role of the propensity score in observational studies for causal effects.” Biometrika, 70(1): 41 – 55. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/biomet/70.l.41.]Search in Google Scholar
[Sarracino, F., C.A.F. Riillo, and M. Mikucka. 2017. “Comparability of web and telephone surveys for the measurement of subjective well-being.” Survey Research Methods, 11(2): 141–169. DOI: https://doi.org/10.18148/srm/2017.vlli2.6740.]Search in Google Scholar
[Schonlau, M., K. Zapert, L.P. Simon, K. Sanstad, S. Marcus, J. Adams, M. Spranca, H. Kan, R. Turner, and S.H. Berry. 2003. “A Comparison Between Responses From a Propensity-Weighted Web Survey and an Identical RDD Survey.” Social Science Computer Review, 21(10): 1–11. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0894439303256551.10.1177/0894439303256551]Search in Google Scholar
[Schouten, B., and J. van der Laan. 2014. ESSnet deliverable WPIII: Mode effect decompositions for the Dutch Labour Force Survey. Deliverable for work package III of the ESSnet on Data Collection for Social Surveys Using Multiple Modes. 5 September, 2014, Wiesbaden, Germany. Available at: https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/cros/content/-workshop-%E2%80%9Cdata-collection-social-surveys-using-multipleQ15modes%E2%80%9D-dcss_en (accessed October 2019).]Search in Google Scholar
[Sentas, P., and L. Angelis. 2006. “Categorical missing data imputation for software cost estimation by multinomial logistic regression.” Journal of Systems and Software, 79(3): 404–414. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jss.2005.02.026.10.1016/j.jss.2005.02.026]Search in Google Scholar
[Shrier, I., R.W. Platt, and R.J. Steele. 2007. Re: “Variable Selection for Propensity Score Models.” American Journal of Epidemiology, 166(2): 238–239. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/aje/kwj149.10.1093/aje/kwj149]Search in Google Scholar
[Sidney, J.A., C. Coberley, J.E. Pope, and A. Wells. 2015. “Extending coarsened exact matching to multiple cohorts: an application to longitudinal well-being program evaluation within an employer population.” Health Services and Outcomes Research Methodology, 15(2): 136–156. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/S10742-014-0136-7.10.1007/s10742-014-0136-7]Search in Google Scholar
[Sinclair, M., J. O’Toole, M. Malawaraarachchi, and K. Leder. 2012. “Comparison of response rates and cost-effectiveness for a community-based survey: postal, internet and telephone modes with generic or personalised recruitment approaches.” BMC Medical Research Methodology, 12(1): 132. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2288-12-132.10.1186/1471-2288-12-132]Search in Google Scholar
[Sousa-Poza, A., and A.A. Sousa-Poza. 2000. “Well-being at work: a cross-national analysis of the levels and determinants of job satisfaction.” The Journal of Socio-Economics, 29(6): 517–538. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S1053-5357(00)00085-8.10.1016/S1053-5357(00)00085-8]Search in Google Scholar
[Stuart, E.A. 2010. “Matching Methods for Causal Inference: A Review and a Look Forward.” Statistical Science, 25(1): 1–21. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1214/09-STS313.10.1214/09-STS313294367020871802]Search in Google Scholar
[Ting, Y. 1997. “Determinants of Job Satisfaction of Federal Government Employees.” Public Personnel Management, 26(3): 313–334. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/009102609702600302.10.1177/009102609702600302]Search in Google Scholar
[Tourangeau, R., L.J. Rips, and K. Rasinski. 2000. The psychology of survey response. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9780511819322]Search in Google Scholar
[Van Buuren, S. 2012. Flexible imputation of missing data. New York, NY: Taylor & Francis Ltd.10.1201/b11826]Search in Google Scholar
[Van Buuren, S., and K. Groothuis-Oudshoorn. 2011. “mice: Multivariate Imputation by Chained Equations in R.” Journal of Statistical Software, 45(3). DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.18637/jss.v045.i03.10.18637/jss.v045.i03]Search in Google Scholar
[VanderWeele, T.J., and P. Ding. 2017. “Sensitivity Analysis in Observational Research: Introducing the E-value.” Annals of Internal Medicine, 167(4): 268–274. DOI: https://doi.org/10.7326/M16-2607.10.7326/M16-260728693043]Search in Google Scholar
[Vannieuwenhuyze, J.T.A., G. Loosveldt, and G. Molenberghs. 2014. “Evaluating Mode Effects in Mixed-Mode Survey Data Using Covariate Adjustment Models.” Journal of Official Statistics, 30(1): 1–21. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2478/jos-2014-0001.10.2478/jos-2014-0001]Search in Google Scholar
[Vila, L.E., and B. Garcia-Mora. 2005. “Education and the Determinants of Job Satisfaction.” Education Economics, 13(4): 409–425. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/09645290500251730.10.1080/09645290500251730]Search in Google Scholar
[Ye, C., Fulton, J., and R. Tourangeau. 2011. “More positive or More Extreme? A Meta-Analysis of Mode Differences in Response Choice.” Public Opinion Quarterly, 75(2). DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/poq/nfr009.10.1093/poq/nfr009]Search in Google Scholar