The quality of survey data: Telephone versus face-to-face interviews

Those designing surveys and producing data have always been concerned about its quality. The increasing stringency of the financial constraints which affect public authorities and the increased scope of involvement in the regulation of urban travel has led us to pay even greater attention to the quality of data. This issue is frequently covered in the literature on survey methods. However, comparisons between different survey methods are more rarely conducted. The decision to conduct such an analysis is partly the result of the development of telephone use to the detriment of other survey modes in many countries and also the development of Computer-Aided Telephone Interviewing (CATI) which facilitates the running and monitoring of the survey. This paper examines several aspects of this question in order to compare the performance of telephone and face-to-face interviews. The first aspect is the representativeness of the sample, and therefore relates mainly to the issue of nonresponses and the choice of a sample base. The second concerns the accuracy of the information and involves the choice of a survey area and the recording of all trips, including short-distance travel. Finally, the quality of data is obviously determined by the quality of the responses given by those interviewed. The answers we give frequently depend on the objective of the surveys, which leads us to put forward a table which summarizes the performance of telephone and face-to-face interviews on the basis of the main objective of the survey. Broadly, the telephone seems to be the favoured tool for surveys in the area of transport planning and surveys which aim to provide data for forecasting models, mostly on the grounds of cost. However, face-to-face techniques are often preferred for surveys which aim to discover and analyze the factors which explain individual travel behaviour.