IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/qualqt/v36y2002i2p129-144.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Importance of Experimental Control in Testing the Impact of Interviewer Continuity on Panel Survey Nonresponse

Author

Listed:
  • Pamela Campanelli
  • Colm O'Muircheartaigh

Abstract

No abstract is available for this item.

Suggested Citation

  • Pamela Campanelli & Colm O'Muircheartaigh, 2002. "The Importance of Experimental Control in Testing the Impact of Interviewer Continuity on Panel Survey Nonresponse," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 36(2), pages 129-144, May.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:qualqt:v:36:y:2002:i:2:p:129-144
    DOI: 10.1023/A:1014928107205
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1023/A:1014928107205
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1023/A:1014928107205?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
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Pamela Campanelli & Colm O'Muircheartaigh, 1999. "Interviewers, Interviewer Continuity, and Panel Survey Nonresponse," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 33(1), pages 59-76, February.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Adrian Chadi, 2019. "Dissatisfied with life or with being interviewed? Happiness and the motivation to participate in a survey," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 53(3), pages 519-553, October.
    2. Lynn Peter & Kaminska Olena & Goldstein Harvey, 2014. "Panel Attrition: How Important is Interviewer Continuity?," Journal of Official Statistics, Sciendo, vol. 30(3), pages 443-457, September.
    3. Schrapler, Jorg-Peter, 2003. "Respondent behaviour in panel studies: a case study for income-nonresponse by means of the British Household Panel Study (BHPS)," ISER Working Paper Series 2003-08, Institute for Social and Economic Research.
    4. Nicoletti, Cheti & Buck, Nick, 2004. "Explaining interviewee contact and co-operation in the British and German Household Panels," ISER Working Paper Series 2004-06, Institute for Social and Economic Research.
    5. Cheti Nicoletti & Franco Peracchi & Vincenzo Atella, 2005. "Survey Response and Survey Characteristics: Micro-level Evidence from the European Commission Household Panel," CEIS Research Paper 64, Tor Vergata University, CEIS.
    6. Nicoletti, Cheti & Peracchi, Franco, 2004. "Survey response and survey characteristics: Micro-level evidence from the ECHP," Economics & Statistics Discussion Papers esdp04015, University of Molise, Department of Economics.

    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. Adrian Chadi, 2019. "Dissatisfied with life or with being interviewed? Happiness and the motivation to participate in a survey," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 53(3), pages 519-553, October.
    2. Rebecca Vassallo & Gabriele Durrant & Peter Smith, 2017. "Separating interviewer and area effects by using a cross-classified multilevel logistic model: simulation findings and implications for survey designs," Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series A, Royal Statistical Society, vol. 180(2), pages 531-550, February.
    3. Jan Pickery & Geert Loosveldt, 2002. "A Multilevel Multinomial Analysis of Interviewer Effects on Various Components of Unit Nonresponse," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 36(4), pages 427-437, November.
    4. West Brady T. & Kreuter Frauke & Jaenichen Ursula, 2013. "“Interviewer” Effects in Face-to-Face Surveys: A Function of Sampling, Measurement Error, or Nonresponse?," Journal of Official Statistics, Sciendo, vol. 29(2), pages 277-297, September.
    5. Michele Lalla & Maddalena Cavicchioli, 2020. "Nonresponse and measurement errors in income: matching individual survey data with administrative tax data," Department of Economics 0170, University of Modena and Reggio E., Faculty of Economics "Marco Biagi".
    6. Mark Amos, 2018. "Interviewer effects on patterns of nonresponse: Evaluating the impact on the reasons for contraceptive nonuse in the Indonesia and the Philippines DHS," Demographic Research, Max Planck Institute for Demographic Research, Rostock, Germany, vol. 39(14), pages 415-430.
    7. Schrapler, Jorg-Peter, 2003. "Respondent behaviour in panel studies: a case study for income-nonresponse by means of the British Household Panel Study (BHPS)," ISER Working Paper Series 2003-08, Institute for Social and Economic Research.
    8. Jörg-Peter Schräpler, 2002. "Respondent Behavior in Panel Studies: A Case Study for Income-Nonresponse by Means of the German Socio-Economic Panel (GSOEP)," Discussion Papers of DIW Berlin 299, DIW Berlin, German Institute for Economic Research.
    9. Brooks, Mark & Lippe, Rattiya S. & Waibel, Hermann, 2021. "PAPI is gone, but errors remain: Non-sampling errors in household surveys," 2021 Conference, August 17-31, 2021, Virtual 315277, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
    10. Geert Loosveldt & Koen Beullens, 2014. "A Procedure to Assess Interviewer Effects on Nonresponse Bias," SAGE Open, , vol. 4(1), pages 21582440145, February.
    11. Veronika Hecht & Nicole Litzel & Johannes Schäffler, 2019. "Unit nonresponse at the firm level: a cross-border analysis using the IAB-ReLOC data," Journal for Labour Market Research, Springer;Institute for Employment Research/ Institut für Arbeitsmarkt- und Berufsforschung (IAB), vol. 53(1), pages 1-18, December.
    12. Finaba Berete & Johan Van der Heyden & Stefaan Demarest & Rana Charafeddine & Lydia Gisle & Elise Braekman & Jean Tafforeau & Geert Molenberghs, 2019. "Determinants of unit nonresponse in multi-mode data collection: A multilevel analysis," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 14(4), pages 1-18, April.
    13. Michele Lalla & Davide Ferrari & Patrizio Frederic, 2012. "Unit nonresponse errors in income surveys: a case study," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 46(6), pages 1769-1794, October.
    14. Noah Uhrig, S.C., 2008. "The nature and causes of attrition in the British Household Panel Study," ISER Working Paper Series 2008-05, Institute for Social and Economic Research.
    15. Mark Brooks & Rattiya S. Lippe & Hermann Waibel, 2020. "Comprehensive data quality studies as a component of poverty assessments," TVSEP Working Papers wp-019, Leibniz Universitaet Hannover, Institute for Environmental Economics and World Trade, Project TVSEP.
    16. Claire Durand, 2005. "Measuring Interviewer Performance in Telephone Surveys," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 39(6), pages 763-778, December.
    17. Dolan, Melissa & Biemer, Paul & Ringeisen, Heather & Testa, Mark & Keeney, Jennifer & Casanueva, Cecilia & Smith, Keith & Day, Orin, 2023. "The third national survey of child and adolescent well-being: Design overview and methodological lessons learned during the baseline wave," Children and Youth Services Review, Elsevier, vol. 155(C).
    18. Koen Beullens & Jaak Billiet & Geert Loosveldt, 2010. "The effect of the elapsed time between the initial refusal and conversion contact on conversion success: evidence from the 2nd round of the European social survey," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 44(6), pages 1053-1065, October.
    19. Maddalena Cavicchioli & Michele Lalla, 2022. "Evidences from survey data and fiscal data: nonresponse and measurement errors in annual incomes," Statistical Methods & Applications, Springer;Società Italiana di Statistica, vol. 31(3), pages 587-615, September.

    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:spr:qualqt:v:36:y:2002:i:2:p:129-144. 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    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.