IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/woemps/v24y2010i3p578-590.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Survey errors and survey costs: a response to Timming’s critique of the Survey of Employees Questionnaire in WERS 2004

Author

Listed:
  • John Forth

    (National Institute of Economic and Social Research, j.forth@niesr.ac.uk)

  • Helen Bewley

    (National Institute of Economic and Social Research, h.bewley@niesr.ac.uk)

  • Alex Bryson

    (National Institute of Economic and Social Research and Centre for Economic Performance, London School of Economics, a.bryson@niesr.ac.uk)

  • Gill Dix

    (Advisory, Conciliation and Arbitration Service (Acas), gdix@acas.org.uk)

  • Sarah Oxenbridge

    (Workplace Research Centre, University of Sydney, s.oxenbridge@econ.usyd.edu.au)

Abstract

A recent article in this journal provided a critique of the design of the Survey of Employees Questionnaire within the 2004 Workplace Employment Relations Survey. The principal criticisms concerned the use of vague response categories, double-barrelled questions, needless ordinal measurements and the use of multiple binary items in place of ordinal or scalar measures. The critique highlighted some areas worthy of attention but we argue that, in other areas, it took insufficient account of the survey’s core objectives and of the practical and financial constraints guiding its design. We offer a broader assessment of sources of error within the WERS 2004 Survey of Employees.

Suggested Citation

  • John Forth & Helen Bewley & Alex Bryson & Gill Dix & Sarah Oxenbridge, 2010. "Survey errors and survey costs: a response to Timming’s critique of the Survey of Employees Questionnaire in WERS 2004," Work, Employment & Society, British Sociological Association, vol. 24(3), pages 578-590, September.
    • Handle: RePEc:sae:woemps:v:24:y:2010:i:3:p:578-590
    DOI: 10.1177/0950017010371647
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0950017010371647
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/0950017010371647?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. John W. Budd & Karen Mumford, 2004. "Trade Unions and Family-Friendly Policies in Britain," ILR Review, Cornell University, ILR School, vol. 57(2), pages 204-222, January.
    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. Kato, Takao & Kodama, Naomi, 2015. "Work-Life Balance Practices, Performance-Related Pay, and Gender Equality in the Workplace: Evidence from Japan," IZA Discussion Papers 9379, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    2. Berg, Peter & Kossek, Ellen Ernst & Baird, Marian & Block, Richard N., 2013. "Collective bargaining and public policy: Pathways to work-family policy adoption in Australia and the United States," European Management Journal, Elsevier, vol. 31(5), pages 495-504.
    3. KATO Takao & KODAMA Naomi, 2016. "Corporate Social Responsibility and Gender Diversity in the Workplace: Evidence from Japan," Discussion papers 16063, Research Institute of Economy, Trade and Industry (RIETI).
    4. Uwe Jirjahn & Jens Mohrenweiser, 2021. "Works councils and organizational gender policies in Germany," British Journal of Industrial Relations, London School of Economics, vol. 59(4), pages 1020-1048, December.
    5. Filipe Almeida‐Santos & Karen A. Mumford, 2004. "Employee Training in Australia: Evidence from AWIRS," The Economic Record, The Economic Society of Australia, vol. 80(s1), pages 53-64, September.
    6. Linda Dickens, 2007. "The Road is Long: Thirty Years of Equality Legislation in Britain," British Journal of Industrial Relations, London School of Economics, vol. 45(3), pages 463-494, September.
    7. John W. Budd, 2010. "Does Employee Ignorance Undermine Shared Capitalism?," NBER Chapters, in: Shared Capitalism at Work: Employee Ownership, Profit and Gain Sharing, and Broad-based Stock Options, pages 291-316, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    8. Fang, Tony & Lee, Byron & Timming, Andrew R. & Fan, Di, 2019. "The Effects of Work-Life Benefits on Employment Outcomes in Canada: A Multivariate Analysis," IZA Discussion Papers 12322, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    9. Ameri, Mason & Ali, Mohammad & Schur, Lisa & Kruse, Douglas L., 2019. "Disability and the Unionized Workplace," IZA Discussion Papers 12258, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    10. Lilian DE MENEZES & Stephen WOOD & Melina DRITSAKI, 2009. "Family-friendly management in Britain under New Labour: were there significant changes between 1998 and 2004?," EcoMod2009 21500024, EcoMod.
    11. Heywood, John S. & Siebert, W. Stanley & Wei, Xiangdong, 2005. "High Performance Workplaces and Family Friendly Practices: Promises Made and Promises Kept," IZA Discussion Papers 1812, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    12. Georgios Marios Chrysanthou, 2007. "Determinants of Trade Union Membership in Great Britain During 1991-2003," Discussion Papers 07/01, Department of Economics, University of York.
    13. Artz, Benjamin & Heywood, John S., 2020. "Unions, Worker Participation and Worker Well-Being," GLO Discussion Paper Series 705, Global Labor Organization (GLO).
    14. Melanie Jones, 2024. "Disability and trade union membership in the UK," British Journal of Industrial Relations, London School of Economics, vol. 62(1), pages 28-49, March.
    15. Héctor Gutiérrez Rufrancos, 2019. "Are There Gains to Joining a Union? Evidence from Mexico," British Journal of Industrial Relations, London School of Economics, vol. 57(3), pages 676-712, September.
    16. Filipe Almeida‐Santos & Karen Mumford, 2005. "Employee Training And Wage Compression In Britain," Manchester School, University of Manchester, vol. 73(3), pages 321-342, June.
    17. Karen Mumford & Antonia Parera‐Nicolau & Yolanda Pena‐Boquete, 2020. "Labour Supply and Childcare: Allowing Both Parents to Choose," Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics, Department of Economics, University of Oxford, vol. 82(3), pages 577-602, June.
    18. Egidio Riva & Roberto Rizza, 2021. "Who receives occupational welfare? The importance of skills across Europe’s diverse industrial relations regimes," Transfer: European Review of Labour and Research, , vol. 27(1), pages 97-112, February.
    19. MORIKAWA Masayuki, 2018. "Long Commuting Time and the Benefits of Telecommuting," Discussion papers 18025, Research Institute of Economy, Trade and Industry (RIETI).
    20. Mohrenweiser, Jens, 2022. "Works Councils," GLO Discussion Paper Series 1103, Global Labor Organization (GLO).

    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:sae:woemps:v:24:y:2010:i:3:p:578-590. 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: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.britsoc.co.uk/ .

    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.