[
Belloni, M., A. Brugiavini, E. Meschi, and K. Tijdens. 2016. “Measuring and detecting errors in occupational coding: an analysis of SHARE data.” Journal of Official Statistics, 32(4): 917–945. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/jos-2016-0049.10.1515/jos-2016-0049
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Bergmann, M.M., and D. Joye. 2005. “Comparing Social Stratification Schemata: CAMSIS, CSP-CH, Goldthorpe, ISCO-88, Treiman, and Wright.” Cambridge Studies in Social Research 10: 1–35. Available at: https://www.sociology.cam.ac.uk/system/-files/documents/cs10.pdf (accessed October 2019).
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Brugiavini, A., M. Belloni, R.E. Buia, and M. Martens. 2017. The “Job Coder”. In SHARE Wave 6: Panel innovations and collecting Dried Blood Spots. Edited by F. Malter and A. Börsch-Supan. Munich: MEA, Max Planck Institute for Social Law and Social Policy: 51–70. Available at: http://www.share-project.org/uploads/tx_sharepublications/201804_SHARE-WAVE-6_MFRB.pdf (accessed October 2019).
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Burstyn, I., A. Slutsky, D.G. Lee, A.B. Singer, Y. An, and Y.L. Michael. 2014. “Beyond Crosswalks: Reliability of Exposure Assessment Following Automated Coding of FreeText Job Descriptions for Occupational Epidemiology.” The Annals of Occupational Hygiene 58(4): 482–492. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/annhyg/meu006.10.1093/annhyg/meu00624504175
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Campanelli, P., K. Thompson, N. Moon, and T. Staples. 1997. “The Quality of Occupational Coding in the United Kingdom.” In Survey Measurement and Process Quality. Edited by L. Lyberg, P. Biemer, M. Collins, E. De Leeuw, C. Dippo, N. Schwarz, and D. Trewin: 437–453. New York: Wiley.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Cantor, D., and J.L. Esposito. 1992. “Evaluating Interviewer Style for Collecting Industry and Occupation Information.” In Proceedings of the Section on Survey Methods, American Statistical Association: 661–666. Available at https://www.bls.gov/osmr/research-papers/1992/pdf/cp920010.pdf (accessed March 2021).
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Centre for Longitudinal Studies. 2017. Next Steps Age 25 Survey. Technical Report. University College London. Available at: http://doc.ukdataservice.ac.uk/doc/5545/mrdoc/pdf/5545age_25_technical_report.pdf (accessed October 2019).
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Conrad, F., M. Couper, and J.W. Sakshaug. 2016. “Classifying Open-Ended Reports: Factors Affecting the Reliability of Occupation Codes.” Journal of Official Statistics 32(1): 75–92. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/jos-2016-0003.10.1515/jos-2016-0003
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Creecy, R.H., B.M. Masand, S.J. Smith, and D.L. Waltz. 1992. “Trading MIPS and memory for knowledge engineering”. Communications of the ACM 35(8): 48–64. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1145/135226.135228.10.1145/135226.135228
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Department for Education. 2011. LSYPE User Guide to the Datasets: Wave 1 to Wave 7. Available at: http://doc.ukdataservice.ac.uk/doc/5545/mrdoc/pdf/5545lsype_user_guide_wave_1_to_wave_7.pdf (accessed October 2019).
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Elias, P., M. Birch, and R. Ellison. 2014. CASCOT International version 5. User Guide. Institute for Employment Research, University of Warwick, Coventry. Available at: https://warwick.ac.uk/fac/soc/ier/software/cascot/internat/cascot_international_user_-guide.pptx (accessed October 2019).
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Gweon H., M. Schonlau, L. Kaczmirek, M. Blohm, and S. Steiner. 2017. “Three Methods for Occupation Coding Based on Statistical Learning.” Journal of Official Statistics 33(1): 101–122. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1515/JOS-2017-0006.10.1515/jos-2017-0006
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Hacking, W., J. Michiels, and S. Jansen, S. 2006. “Computer Assisted Coding by Interviewers.” In Proceedings of the 10th International Blaise Users Conference, IBUC 2006, 9–12 May, Arnhem, The Netherlands. Available at: http://blaiseusers.org/2006/Papers/291.pdf (accessed October 2019).
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Helppie-McFall, B. and A. Sonnega. 2018. Feasibility and Reliability of Automated Coding of Occupation in the Health and Retirement Study. Ann Arbor MI: University of Michigan Retirement Research Center (WP 2018-392). Available at: https://mrdrc.isr.umich.edu/publications/papers/pdf/wp392.pdf (accessed October 2020).10.2139/ssrn.3338502
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Hoffman, E. 1995. What Kind of Work Do You Do? Data collection and processing strategies when measuring “occupation” for statistical surveys and administrative records. ILO. (WP 1995: 95-1). Available at: https://www.ilo.org/wcmsp5/groups/public/–-dgreports/–-stat/documents/publication/wcms_087880.pdf (accessed October 2019).
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Hox, J.J., E.D. De Leeuw, and E.A. Zijlmans. 2015. “Measurement Equivalence in Mixed Mode Surveys.” Frontiers in Psychology 6(87): 1–11. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2015.00087.10.3389/fpsyg.2015.00087431828225699002
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Klausch, T., B. Schouten, and J.J. Hox. 2017. “Evaluating Bias of Sequential Mixed-Mode Designs against Benchmark Surveys,” Sociological Methods and Research 46(3): 456–489. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0049124115585362.10.1177/0049124115585362
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Lyberg, L., and P. Dean. 1992. Automated Coding of Survey Responses: An International Review. R&D Reports (1992–2). Statistics Sweden, Stockholm, Sweden. Available at: https://www.scb.se/contentassets/7c4edb581f8745e3a081e1ba9b332eb4/rnd-report-1992-02-green.pdf (accessed October 2019).
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Massing, N., M. Wasmer, C. Wolf, and C. Zuell. 2019. “How Standardized is Occupational Coding? A Comparison of Results from Different Coding Agencies in Germany.” Journal of Official Statistics 35(1): 167–187. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.2478/JOS-2019-0008.10.2478/jos-2019-0008
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Office for National Statistics. 2010a. Standard Occupational Classification 2010 Volume 1 Structure and descriptions of unit groups. Available at: https://www.ons.gov.uk/-methodology/classificationsandstandards/standardoccupationalclassificationsoc/-soc2010/soc2010volume1structureanddescriptionsofunitgroups (accessed October 2019).
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Office for National Statistics. 2010b. Standard Occupational Classification 2010 Volume 2: the structure and coding index. Available at: https://www.https://www.ons.gov.uk/-methodology/classificationsandstandards/standardoccupationalclassificationsoc/-soc2010/soc2010volume2thestructureandcodingindex (accessed October 2020).
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Ossiander, E.M., and S. Milham. 2006. “A computer system for coding occupation.” American Journal of Industrial Medicine 49: 854–857. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/ajim.20355.10.1002/ajim.2035516804909
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Schierholz, M., M. Gensicke, N. Tschersich, and F. Kreuter. 2018. “Occupation Coding During the Interview.” Journal of the Royal Statistical Society A 181: 379–407. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/rssa.12297.10.1111/rssa.12297
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Schierholz, M., and M. Schonlau. 2020. “Machine Learning for Occupation Coding – a Comparison Study.” Journal of Survey Statistics and Methodology, smaa023. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/jssam/smaa023.10.1093/jssam/smaa023
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Tijdens, K. 2014. Reviewing the measurement and comparison of occupations across Europe (WP 149, AIAS). Available at: https://pure.uva.nl/ws/files/2172301/154005_WP149_Tijdens_1.pdf (accessed October 2019).
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Tijdens, K. 2015a. The design of a tool for the measurement of occupations in web surveys using a global index of occupations. Leuven. (WP InGRID project M21.2). Available at: https://inclusivegrowth.be/downloads/output/m21-4-coding-tool-eind.pdf (accessed October 2020).
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Tijdens, K. 2015b. “Self-identification of occupation in web surveys: requirements for search trees and look-up tables” Survey Methods: Insights from the Field. Available at: https://surveyinsights.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/06/Self-identification-of-occupation-in-web-surveys-requirements-for-search-trees-and-look-up-tables-Survey-Methods-Insights-from-the-Field-SMIF.pdf (accessed October 2020).
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Tijdens, K. 2016. “Measuring occupations: respondent’s self- identification from a large database.” In Proceedings of European Conference on Quality of Official Statistics, Special session: Synergies for Europe’s Research Infrastructures in the Social Sciences and Official Statistics (SERISS), 2 June 2016. Available at: https://seriss.eu/wp-content/uploads/2016/06/Measuring-Occupations-Respondent%e2%80%99s-self-identification-from-a-large-database.pdf (accessed October 2020).
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Tijdens, K., and S. Visintin. 2017. EU-harmonised and comparative measurement of occupations and skills. Leuven. (InGRID project Deliverable 21.1). Available at: https://inclusivegrowth.be/downloads/output/d21-1-eind.pdf (accessed October 2019).
]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 and Research 42(1): 82–104. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0049124112464868.10.1177/0049124112464868
]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
