Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38164439›Full record

ArticleJournal of development economics2024

Does survey mode matter? Comparing in-person and phone agricultural surveys in India.

Ellen Anderson, Travis J Lybbert, Ashish Shenoy, Rupika Singh, Daniel Stein

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of development economics, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Ellen AndersonUniversity of California, Davis, United States of America.
Travis J LybbertUniversity of California, Davis, United States of America.
Ashish ShenoyUniversity of California, Davis, United States of America.
Rupika SinghIndia Climate Collaborative, India.
Daniel SteinIDinsight, United States of America.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Ubiquitous mobile phone ownership makes phone surveying an attractive method of low-cost data collection. We explore differences between in-person and phone survey measures of agricultural production collected for an impact evaluation in India. Phone responses have greater mean and variance, a difference that persists even within a subset of respondents that answered the same question over both modes. Treatment effect estimation remains stable across survey mode, but estimates are less precise when using phone data. These patterns are informative for cost and sample size considerations in study design and for aggregating evidence across study sites or time periods.

Indexed as

AgricultureData collectionMeasurement errorPhone surveySurvey mode

Identifiers

PMID38164439
PMCPMC10729321

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.