ArticleField methods2014
Does Sequence Matter in Multi-Mode Surveys: Results from an Experiment.
Article in Field methods, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- An Experimental Evaluation of Two Approaches for Improving Response to Household Screening Efforts in National Mail/Web Surveys.Journal of survey statistics and methodology · 2023Article
- Comparability of in-person and web screening: Does mode affect what households report?PloS one · 2022Article
- Address-Based Sampling for Recruiting Rural Subpopulations: A 2-Phase, Multimode Approach.The Journal of rural health : official journal of the American Rural Health Association and the National Rural Health Care Association · 2018Article
- Overview of the Health and Retirement Study and Introduction to the Special Issue.Work, aging and retirement · 2018Article
- Timing the Mode Switch in a Sequential Mixed-Mode Survey: An Experimental Evaluation of the Impact on Final Response Rates, Key Estimates, and Costs.Social science computer review · 2017Article
- Maximizing Data Quality using Mode Switching in Mixed-Device Survey Design: Nonresponse Bias and Models of Demographic Behavior.Methoden, daten, analysenArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Interest in a multi-mode approach to surveys has grown substantially in recent years, in part due to increased costs of face-to-face interviewing and the emergence of the internet as a survey mode. Yet, there is little systematic evidence of the impact of a multimode approach on survey costs and errors. This paper reports the results of an experiment designed to evaluate whether a mixed-mode approach to a large screening survey would produce comparable response rates at a lower cost than a face-to-face screening effort. The experiment was carried out in the Health and Retirement Study (HRS), an ongoing panel study of Americans over age 50. In 2010, HRS conducted a household screening survey to recruit new sample members to supplement the existing sample. The experiment varied the sequence of modes with which the screening interview was delivered. One treatment offered mail first, followed by face-to-face interviewing; the other started with face-to-face and then mail. A control group was offered only face-to-face interviewing. Results suggest that the mixed mode options reduced costs without reducing response rates to the screening interview. There is some evidence, however, that the sequence of modes offered may impact the response rate for a follow-up in-depth interview.
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.