IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ese/iserwp/2008-41.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Measuring nonresponse cross-nationally

Author

Listed:
  • G. Blom, Annelies

Abstract

This paper investigates the measurement of nonresponse outcomes across countries. It consists of three sections. Section one proposes a conceptual framework of influences on the response outcomes available for analysis. Section two develops a crossnational codeframe of response outcome codes. The last section investigates the impact that differential ways of deriving final case outcomes have on the estimated response, contact and cooperation rates. The results emphasise the importance of careful measurement of the nonresponse process for conclusions about the similarity and differences across countries in processes leading to nonresponse.

Suggested Citation

  • G. Blom, Annelies, 2008. "Measuring nonresponse cross-nationally," ISER Working Paper Series 2008-41, Institute for Social and Economic Research.
    • Handle: RePEc:ese:iserwp:2008-41
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.iser.essex.ac.uk/wp-content/uploads/files/working-papers/iser/2008-41.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Lynn, Peter & Jäckle, Annette & G. Blom, Annelies, 2008. "Understanding cross-national differences in unit non-response: the role of contact data," ISER Working Paper Series 2008-01, Institute for Social and Economic Research.
    2. Robert M. Groves & Steven G. Heeringa, 2006. "Responsive design for household surveys: tools for actively controlling survey errors and costs," Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series A, Royal Statistical Society, vol. 169(3), pages 439-457, July.
    3. Lynn, Peter, 2001. "Developing quality standard for cross-national survey research: five approaches," ISER Working Paper Series 2001-21, Institute for Social and Economic Research.
    4. Lynn, Peter & S. Clarke, Paul, 2001. "Separating refusal bias and non-contact bias: evidence from UK national surveys," ISER Working Paper Series 2001-24, Institute for Social and Economic Research.
    5. Lynn, Peter & Martin, Jean & Beerten, Roeland & Laiho, Johanna, 2001. "Recommended standard final outcome categories and standard definitions of response rate for social surveys," ISER Working Paper Series 2001-23, Institute for Social and Economic Research.
    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. Nathalie Greenan & Edward Lorenz & Stephen Allan & Thomas Amossé & Daniele Archiburgi & Anthony Arundel & Eva Bejerot & Lutz Bellmann & Sophie Bressé & Adam Coutts & Peter Csizmadia & Peter Ester & Jo, 2010. "The MEADOW Guidelines," Post-Print halshs-01362486, HAL.

    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. Mario Callegaro & Charlotte Steeh & Trent D. Buskirk & Vasja Vehovar & Vesa Kuusela & Linda Piekarski, 2007. "Fitting disposition codes to mobile phone surveys: experiences from studies in Finland, Slovenia and the USA," Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series A, Royal Statistical Society, vol. 170(3), pages 647-670, July.
    2. Lagorio, Carlos, 2016. "Call and response: modelling longitudinal contact and cooperation using Wave 1 call records data," Understanding Society Working Paper Series 2016-01, Understanding Society at the Institute for Social and Economic Research.
    3. Lynn, Peter & Jäckle, Annette & G. Blom, Annelies, 2008. "Understanding cross-national differences in unit non-response: the role of contact data," ISER Working Paper Series 2008-01, Institute for Social and Economic Research.
    4. Kleinert, Corinna & Ruland, Michael & Trahms, Annette, 2013. "Bias in einem komplexen Surveydesign : Ausfallprozesse und Selektivität in der IAB-Befragung ALWA," FDZ Methodenreport 201302_de, Institut für Arbeitsmarkt- und Berufsforschung (IAB), Nürnberg [Institute for Employment Research, Nuremberg, Germany].
    5. G. Blom, Annelies, 2009. "Explaining cross-country differences in contact rates," ISER Working Paper Series 2009-08, Institute for Social and Economic Research.
    6. Early Kirstin & Mankoff Jennifer & Fienberg Stephen E., 2017. "Dynamic Question Ordering in Online Surveys," Journal of Official Statistics, Sciendo, vol. 33(3), pages 625-657, September.
    7. Giacomello, Giampiero & Picci, Lucio, 2003. "My scale or your meter? Evaluating methods of measuring the Internet," Information Economics and Policy, Elsevier, vol. 15(3), pages 363-383, September.
    8. Chun Asaph Young & Schouten Barry & Wagner James, 2017. "JOS Special Issue on Responsive and Adaptive Survey Design: Looking Back to See Forward – Editorial: In Memory of Professor Stephen E. Fienberg, 1942–2016," Journal of Official Statistics, Sciendo, vol. 33(3), pages 571-577, September.
    9. Reza C. Daniels, 2012. "A Framework for Investigating Micro Data Quality, with Application to South African Labour Market Household Surveys," SALDRU Working Papers 90, Southern Africa Labour and Development Research Unit, University of Cape Town.
    10. Reist, Benjamin M. & Rodhouse, Joseph B. & Ball, Shane T. & Young, Linda J., 2019. "Subsampling of Nonrespondents in the 2017 Census of Agriculture," NASS Research Reports 322826, United States Department of Agriculture, National Agricultural Statistics Service.
    11. Giuseppe Nocella & Lionel Hubbard & Riccardo Scarpa, 2010. "Farm Animal Welfare, Consumer Willingness to Pay, and Trust: Results of a Cross-National Survey," Applied Economic Perspectives and Policy, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 32(2), pages 275-297.
    12. Lewis Taylor, 2017. "Univariate Tests for Phase Capacity: Tools for Identifying When to Modify a Survey’s Data Collection Protocol," Journal of Official Statistics, Sciendo, vol. 33(3), pages 601-624, September.
    13. Jiayun Jin & Caroline Vandenplas & Geert Loosveldt, 2019. "The Evaluation of Statistical Process Control Methods to Monitor Interview Duration During Survey Data Collection," SAGE Open, , vol. 9(2), pages 21582440198, June.
    14. Andy Peytchev, 2013. "Consequences of Survey Nonresponse," The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, , vol. 645(1), pages 88-111, January.
    15. Roger Tourangeau & J. Michael Brick & Sharon Lohr & Jane Li, 2017. "Adaptive and responsive survey designs: a review and assessment," Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series A, Royal Statistical Society, vol. 180(1), pages 203-223, January.
    16. repec:iab:iabfda:201307(en is not listed on IDEAS
    17. Roberts Caroline & Vandenplas Caroline & Herzing Jessica M.E., 2020. "A Validation of R-Indicators as a Measure of the Risk of Bias using Data from a Nonresponse Follow-Up Survey," Journal of Official Statistics, Sciendo, vol. 36(3), pages 675-701, September.
    18. Böhme, Marcus & Stöhr, Tobias, 2012. "Guidelines for the use of household interview duration analysis in CAPI survey management," Kiel Working Papers 1779, Kiel Institute for the World Economy (IfW Kiel).
    19. Tineke Fokkema & Andrej Kveder & Nicole Hiekel & Tom Emery & Aart C. Liefbroer, 2016. "Generations and Gender Programme Wave 1 data collection," Demographic Research, Max Planck Institute for Demographic Research, Rostock, Germany, vol. 34(18), pages 499-524.
    20. Durrant Gabriele B. & Maslovskaya Olga & Smith Peter W. F., 2017. "Using Prior Wave Information and Paradata: Can They Help to Predict Response Outcomes and Call Sequence Length in a Longitudinal Study?," Journal of Official Statistics, Sciendo, vol. 33(3), pages 801-833, September.
    21. Raphael Nishimura & James Wagner & Michael Elliott, 2016. "Alternative Indicators for the Risk of Non-response Bias: A Simulation Study," International Statistical Review, International Statistical Institute, vol. 84(1), pages 43-62, April.

    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:ese:iserwp:2008-41. 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: Jonathan Nears (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/rcessuk.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.