An evaluation of respondent selection methods for household mail surveys

被引:56
作者
Battaglia, Michael P. [1 ]
Link, Michael W. [2 ]
Frankel, Martin R. [3 ]
Osborn, Larry [4 ]
Mokdad, Ali H. [5 ]
机构
[1] ABT Associates Inc, Cambridge, MA 02138 USA
[2] Nielsen Media Res, Marietta, GA 30062 USA
[3] CUNY, Baruch Coll, Cos Cob, CT 06807 USA
[4] ABT Associates Inc, Chicago, IL 60610 USA
[5] Natl Ctr Chron Dis Prevent & Hlth Promot, Ctr Dis Control & Prevent, Atlanta, GA 30341 USA
关键词
D O I
10.1093/poq/nfn026
中图分类号
G2 [信息与知识传播];
学科分类号
05 ; 0503 ;
摘要
Mail surveys are a staple of the survey industry; however, they are rarely used in surveys of the general population. The problem is twofold: (1) lack of a complete sampling frame of households and (2) difficulties with ensuring random selection of a respondent within the household. However, advances in electronic record keeping, such as the U.S. Postal Service Delivery Sequence File, now make it possible to sample from a frame of residential addresses. Unfortunately, less is known about the effectiveness of within-household selection techniques for household mail surveys. A six-state pilot study was conducted as part of the 2005 Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System using the Delivery Sequence File to sample addresses for a mail survey. The pilot study tested three respondent selection methods: any adult, adult with the next birthday, and all adults. The next-birthday and all-adults methods yielded household-level response rates that were comparable to the any-adult method, the method assumed to have the least respondent burden. At the respondent level, however, the response rate for the all-adults method was lower when we accounted for within-household nonresponse.
引用
收藏
页码:459 / 469
页数:11
相关论文
共 12 条
[1]  
*AM ASS PUBL OP RE, 2004, STAND DEF FIN DISP C
[2]   ESTIMATING THE EFFECT OF INCENTIVES ON MAIL SURVEY RESPONSE RATES - A METAANALYSIS [J].
CHURCH, AH .
PUBLIC OPINION QUARTERLY, 1993, 57 (01) :62-79
[3]   Comparative analysis of within-household respondent selection techniques [J].
Gaziano, C .
PUBLIC OPINION QUARTERLY, 2005, 69 (01) :124-157
[5]  
Kish L., 1965, SURVEY SAMPLING
[6]  
LAVRAKAS P, 2000, P AM STAT ASS SURV R
[7]  
LIND K, 2000, P AM STAT ASS SURV R
[8]  
LINK M, 2005, P FED COMM STAT METH
[9]   A comparison of address-based sampling (ABS) versus random-digit dialing (RDD) for general population surveys [J].
Link, Michael W. ;
Battaglia, Michael P. ;
Frankel, Martin R. ;
Osborn, Larry ;
Mokdad, Ali H. .
PUBLIC OPINION QUARTERLY, 2008, 72 (01) :6-27
[10]   Address-based versus random-digit-dial surveys: Comparison of key health and risk indicators [J].
Link, Michael W. ;
Battaglia, Michael P. ;
Frankel, Martin R. ;
Osborn, Larry ;
Mokdad, Ali H. .
AMERICAN JOURNAL OF EPIDEMIOLOGY, 2006, 164 (10) :1019-1025