[Barbier, S., C. Wuyts, P. Italiano, and G. Loosveldt. 2016. European Social Survey Round 7 Belgium: Process evaluation for the data collection. Leuven: KU Leuven.]Search in Google Scholar
[Beullens, K., J. Billiet, and G. Loosveldt. 2009. Selection strategies for refusal conversion of four countries in the European Social Survey, 3rd round. Leuven: KU Leuven.]Search in Google Scholar
[Beullens, K. and G. Loosveldt. 2012. “Should high response rates really be a primary objective?” Survey Practice 5(3): 1–5. DOI: https://doi.org/10.29115/SP-2012-0019.10.29115/SP-2012-0019]Search in Google Scholar
[Beullens, K., G. Loosveldt, C. Vandenplas C., and I. Stoop. 2018. “Response rates in the European Social Survey: Increasing, decreasing, or a matter of fieldwork efforts? Survey methods: Insights from the field.” Available at: https://surveyinsights.org/?p=9673 (accessed May 2020).]Search in Google Scholar
[Blom, A., E. de Leeuw, and J. Hox. 2011. “Interviewer effects on nonresponse in the European Social Survey.” Journal of Official Statistics 27(2): 359–377. Available at: https://www.scb.se/contentassets/ca21efb41fee47d293bbee5bf7be7fb3/interviewer-effects-on-nonresponse-in-the-european-social-survey.pdf (accessed May 2020).]Search in Google Scholar
[Brick, J.M. and R. Tourangeau. 2017. “Responsive survey designs for reducing nonresponse bias.” Journal of Official Statistics 33(3): 735–752. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/jos-2017-0034.10.1515/jos-2017-0034]Search in Google Scholar
[Burton, J., H. Laurie, and P. Lynn. 2006. “The long-term effectiveness of refusal conversion procedures on longitudinal surveys.” Journal of the Royal Statistical Society. Series A (Statistics in Society) 169(3): 459–478. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-985X.2006.00415.x.10.1111/j.1467-985X.2006.00415.x]Search in Google Scholar
[Chun, A.Y., S.G. Heeringa, and B. Schouten. 2018. “Responsive and adaptive design for survey optimization.” Journal of Official Statistics 34(3): 581–597. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2478/jos-2018-0028.10.2478/jos-2018-0028]Search in Google Scholar
[Curtin, R., S. Presser, and E. Singer. 2000. “The effects of response rate changes on the index of consumer sentiment.” Public Opinion Quarterly 64(4): 413–428. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1086/318638.10.1086/31863811171024]Search in Google Scholar
[Durrant, G., R. Groves, L. Staetsky, and F. Steele. 2010. “Effects of interviewer attitudes and behaviors on refusal in household surveys”. Public Opinion Quarterly 74(1): 1–36. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/poq/nfp098.10.1093/poq/nfp098]Search in Google Scholar
[European Social Survey. 2015. ESS Round 7 (2014/2015) Technical Report. London: ESS ERIC.]Search in Google Scholar
[European Social Survey. 2017. ESS Round 8 (2016/2017) Technical Report. London: ESS ERIC.]Search in Google Scholar
[Gideon, L. 2012. Handbook of survey methodology for the social sciences. New York: Springer.10.1007/978-1-4614-3876-2]Search in Google Scholar
[Groves, R. 2006. “Nonresponse rates and nonresponse bias in household surveys.” Public Opinion Quarterly 70(5): 646–675. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/poq/nfl033.10.1093/poq/nfl033]Search in Google Scholar
[Groves, R.M. and M.P. Couper. 2012. Nonresponse in household interview surveys. Hoboken, New Jersey: John Wiley & Sons.]Search in Google Scholar
[Lynn, P. and P. Clarke. 2002. “Separating refusal bias and non-contact bias: Evidence from UK national surveys.” Journal of the Royal Statistical Society 51(3): 319–333. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9884.00321.10.1111/1467-9884.00321]Search in Google Scholar
[O’Muircheartaigh, C. and P. Campanelli. 1999. “A multilevel exploration of the role of interviewers in survey non-response.” Journal of the Royal Statistical Society: Series A (Statistics in Society) 162(3): 437–446. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-985X.00147.10.1111/1467-985X.00147]Search in Google Scholar
[Pickery, J. and G. Loosveldt. 2002. “A multilevel multinomial analysis of interviewer effects on various components of unit nonresponse.” Quality and Quantity 36(4): 427–437. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1020905911108.10.1023/A:1020905911108]Search in Google Scholar
[Schouten, B., A. Peytchev, and J. Wagner. 2017. “Adaptive Survey Design.” Series on Statistics Handbooks, Chapman and Hall/CRC.10.1201/9781315153964]Search in Google Scholar
[Stoop, I. 2004. “Surveying nonrespondents.” Field Methods 16(1): 23–54. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/1525822X03259479.10.1177/1525822X03259479]Search in Google Scholar
[Stoop, I., A. Koch, V. Halbherr, R. Fitzgerald, and S. Widdop. 2014. Field procedures in the European Social Survey Round 7: Enhancing response rates. The Hague: European Social Survey, SCP. Available at: http://www.europeansocialsurvey.org (accessed June 2020).]Search in Google Scholar
[Tarnai, J. and D.L. Moore. 2008. “Measuring and improving telephone interviewer performance and productivity.” In Advances in telephone survey methodology, edited by E. de Leeuw, L. Japec, P.J. Lavrakas, M.W. Link, and R.L. Sangster. pp. 359–384, Hoboken, New Jersey: John Wiley & Sons.10.1002/9780470173404.ch17]Search in Google Scholar
[West, B.T. and K. Olson. 2010. “How much of interviewer variance is really nonresponse error variance?” Public Opinion Quarterly 74(5): 1004 – 1026. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/poq/nfq061.10.1093/poq/nfq061]Search in Google Scholar
[Wright, G. 2015. “An empirical examination of the relationship between nonresponse rate and nonresponse bias.” Statistical Journal of the IAOS 31(2): 305–315. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3233/sji-140844.10.3233/sji-140844]Search in Google Scholar
[Wuyts, C., L. Jacobs, D. de Coninck, P. Italiano, and G. Loosveldt. 2018. European Social Survey Round 8 Belgium: Process evaluation for data collection. Leuven: KU Leuven.]Search in Google Scholar