IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/jorssa/v185y2022i3p822-850.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The impact of using the Web in a mixed‐mode follow‐up of a longitudinal birth cohort study: Evidence from the National Child Development Study

Author

Listed:
  • Alissa Goodman
  • Matt Brown
  • Richard J. Silverwood
  • Joseph W. Sakshaug
  • Lisa Calderwood
  • Joel Williams
  • George B. Ploubidis

Abstract

A sequential mixed‐mode data collection, online‐to‐telephone, was introduced into the National Child Development Study for the first time at the study's age 55 sweep in 2013. The study included a small experiment, whereby a randomised subset of study members was allocated to a single mode, telephone‐only interview, in order to test for the presence of mode effects on participation and measurement. Relative to telephone‐only, the offer of the Web increased overall participation rates by 5.0 percentage points (82.8% vs. 77.8%; 95% confidence interval for difference: 2.7% to 7.3%). Differences attributable to mode of interview were detected in levels of item non‐response and response values for a limited number of questions. Most notably, response by Web (relative to telephone) was found to have increased the likelihood of non‐response to questions relating to pay and other financial matters, and increased the likelihood of ‘less desirable’ responses. For example, response by Web resulted in the reporting of more units of alcohol consumed, and more negative responses to subjective questions such as self‐rated health, self‐rated financial status and well‐being. As there was evidence of mode effects, there is the potential for biases in some analyses, unless appropriate techniques are utilised to correct for these.

Suggested Citation

  • Alissa Goodman & Matt Brown & Richard J. Silverwood & Joseph W. Sakshaug & Lisa Calderwood & Joel Williams & George B. Ploubidis, 2022. "The impact of using the Web in a mixed‐mode follow‐up of a longitudinal birth cohort study: Evidence from the National Child Development Study," Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series A, Royal Statistical Society, vol. 185(3), pages 822-850, July.
    • Handle: RePEc:bla:jorssa:v:185:y:2022:i:3:p:822-850
    DOI: 10.1111/rssa.12786
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/rssa.12786
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/rssa.12786?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Annette Jäckle & Caroline Roberts & Peter Lynn, 2010. "Assessing the Effect of Data Collection Mode on Measurement," International Statistical Review, International Statistical Institute, vol. 78(1), pages 3-20, April.
    2. Imbens,Guido W. & Rubin,Donald B., 2015. "Causal Inference for Statistics, Social, and Biomedical Sciences," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521885881, October.
    3. Siemiatycki, J., 1979. "A comparison of mail, telephone, and home interview strategies for household health surveys," American Journal of Public Health, American Public Health Association, vol. 69(3), pages 238-245.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Pirmin Fessler & Maximilian Kasy & Peter Lindner, 2018. "Survey mode effects on measured income inequality," The Journal of Economic Inequality, Springer;Society for the Study of Economic Inequality, vol. 16(4), pages 487-505, December.
    2. Sven Resnjanskij & Jens Ruhose & Simon Wiederhold & Ludger Wößmann, 2021. "Mentoring verbessert die Arbeitsmarktchancen von stark benachteiligten Jugendlichen," ifo Schnelldienst, ifo Institute - Leibniz Institute for Economic Research at the University of Munich, vol. 74(02), pages 31-38, February.
    3. Alexandre Belloni & Victor Chernozhukov & Denis Chetverikov & Christian Hansen & Kengo Kato, 2018. "High-dimensional econometrics and regularized GMM," CeMMAP working papers CWP35/18, Centre for Microdata Methods and Practice, Institute for Fiscal Studies.
    4. Dimitris Bertsimas & Agni Orfanoudaki & Rory B. Weiner, 2020. "Personalized treatment for coronary artery disease patients: a machine learning approach," Health Care Management Science, Springer, vol. 23(4), pages 482-506, December.
    5. Clément de Chaisemartin & Jaime Ramirez-Cuellar, 2024. "At What Level Should One Cluster Standard Errors in Paired and Small-Strata Experiments?," American Economic Journal: Applied Economics, American Economic Association, vol. 16(1), pages 193-212, January.
    6. Clément de Chaisemartin & Luc Behaghel, 2020. "Estimating the Effect of Treatments Allocated by Randomized Waiting Lists," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 88(4), pages 1453-1477, July.
    7. Bruno Ferman & Cristine Pinto & Vitor Possebom, 2020. "Cherry Picking with Synthetic Controls," Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 39(2), pages 510-532, March.
    8. Bonesrønning, Hans & Finseraas, Henning & Hardoy, Ines & Iversen, Jon Marius Vaag & Nyhus, Ole Henning & Opheim, Vibeke & Salvanes, Kari Vea & Sandsør, Astrid Marie Jorde & Schøne, Pål, 2022. "Small-group instruction to improve student performance in mathematics in early grades: Results from a randomized field experiment," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 216(C).
    9. Peydró, José-Luis & Jiménez, Gabriel & Kenan, Huremovic & Moral-Benito, Enrique & Vega-Redondo, Fernando, 2020. "Production and financial networks in interplay: Crisis evidence from supplier-customer and credit registers," CEPR Discussion Papers 15277, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    10. Zawojska, Ewa & Czajkowski, Mikotaj, 2017. "Are preferences stated in web vs. personal interviews different? A comparison of willingness to pay results for a large multi-country study of the Baltic Sea eutrophication reduction," Annual Meeting, 2017, June 18-21, Montreal, Canada 258604, Canadian Agricultural Economics Society.
    11. Ruoxuan Xiong & Allison Koenecke & Michael Powell & Zhu Shen & Joshua T. Vogelstein & Susan Athey, 2021. "Federated Causal Inference in Heterogeneous Observational Data," Papers 2107.11732, arXiv.org, revised Apr 2023.
    12. Robin J. Evans & Thomas S. Richardson, 2013. "Marginal log-linear parameters for graphical Markov models," Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series B, Royal Statistical Society, vol. 75(4), pages 743-768, September.
    13. Marie Bjørneby & Annette Alstadsæter & Kjetil Telle, 2018. "Collusive tax evasion by employers and employees. Evidence from a randomized fi eld experiment in Norway," Discussion Papers 891, Statistics Norway, Research Department.
    14. Konrad Menzel, 2021. "Structural Sieves," Papers 2112.01377, arXiv.org, revised Apr 2022.
    15. Susan Athey & Guido W. Imbens & Stefan Wager, 2018. "Approximate residual balancing: debiased inference of average treatment effects in high dimensions," Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series B, Royal Statistical Society, vol. 80(4), pages 597-623, September.
    16. Alberto Abadie & Susan Athey & Guido W. Imbens & Jeffrey M. Wooldridge, 2020. "Sampling‐Based versus Design‐Based Uncertainty in Regression Analysis," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 88(1), pages 265-296, January.
    17. Andrés Elberg & Pedro M. Gardete & Rosario Macera & Carlos Noton, 2019. "Dynamic effects of price promotions: field evidence, consumer search, and supply-side implications," Quantitative Marketing and Economics (QME), Springer, vol. 17(1), pages 1-58, March.
    18. Suresh de Mel & David McKenzie & Christopher Woodruff, 2019. "Labor Drops: Experimental Evidence on the Return to Additional Labor in Microenterprises," American Economic Journal: Applied Economics, American Economic Association, vol. 11(1), pages 202-235, January.
    19. Davide Viviano & Jelena Bradic, 2019. "Synthetic learner: model-free inference on treatments over time," Papers 1904.01490, arXiv.org, revised Aug 2022.
    20. Chenchuan (Mark) Li & Ulrich K. Müller, 2021. "Linear regression with many controls of limited explanatory power," Quantitative Economics, Econometric Society, vol. 12(2), pages 405-442, May.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:bla:jorssa:v:185:y:2022:i:3:p:822-850. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/rssssea.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.