4.3 Article

Exploring the Effects of Interviewer- and Self-Administered Survey Modes on Record Linkage Consent Rates and Bias

期刊

SURVEY RESEARCH METHODS
卷 11, 期 2, 页码 171-188

出版社

EUROPEAN SURVEY RESEARCH ASSOCIATION
DOI: 10.18148/srm/2017.v11i2.7158

关键词

administrative records; informed consent; mode effects; employment survey; record linkage

资金

  1. German Research Foundation (DFG) of DFG Research Center (SFB) [882]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

In an effort to reduce data collection costs survey organizations are considering more cost-effective means of data collection. Such means include greater use of self-administered interview modes and acquiring substantive information from external administrative records conditional on respondent consent. Yet, little is known regarding the implications of requesting record linkage consent under self-administered survey modes with respect to consent rates and consent bias. To address this knowledge gap, we report results from a linkage consent study in which employees in an employment survey were randomly assigned to an interviewer-administered (face-to-face) or self-administered (mail/web) interview, which included a consent question to link to federal employment records. We observed a strikingly lower linkage consent rate in the self-administered (53.9 percent) versus the interviewer-administered (93.9 percent) survey mode. However, the impact of survey mode on linkage consent bias was much less severe: survey-measured correlates of linkage consent did not interact with mode and relative consent biases in the linked-administrative variables tended to be small (less than 6 percentage points) under both mode groups; though, linkage consent biases in the administrative variables were larger in the self-administered mode group compared to the interviewer-administered mode group, on average. We discuss the implications of these findings for survey practice and speculate on their possible causes.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.3
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据