IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/cup/polals/v29y2021i2p121-138_1.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

How to Get Better Survey Data More Efficiently

Author

Listed:
  • Cohen, Mollie J.
  • Warner, Zach

Abstract

A key challenge facing many large, in-person public opinion surveys is ensuring that enumerators follow fieldwork protocols. Implementing “quality control” processes can improve data quality and help ensure the representativeness of the final sample. Yet while public opinion researchers have demonstrated the utility of quality control procedures such as audio capture and geo-tracking, there is little research assessing the relative merits of such tools. In this paper, we present new evidence on this question using data from the 2016/17 wave of the AmericasBarometer study. Results from a large classification task demonstrate that a small set of automated and human-coded variables, available across popular survey platforms, can recover the final sample of interviews that results when a full suite of quality control procedures is implemented. Taken as a whole, our results indicate that implementing and automating just a few of the many quality control procedures available can streamline survey researchers’ quality control processes while substantially improving the quality of their data.

Suggested Citation

  • Cohen, Mollie J. & Warner, Zach, 2021. "How to Get Better Survey Data More Efficiently," Political Analysis, Cambridge University Press, vol. 29(2), pages 121-138, April.
    • Handle: RePEc:cup:polals:v:29:y:2021:i:2:p:121-138_1
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.cambridge.org/core/product/identifier/S1047198720000200/type/journal_article
    File Function: link to article abstract page
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Goel, Deepti & Abraham, Rosa & Lahoti, Rahul, 2022. "Improving Survey Quality using Paradata: Lessons from the India Working Survey," GLO Discussion Paper Series 1035, Global Labor Organization (GLO).

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:cup:polals:v:29:y:2021:i:2:p:121-138_1. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Kirk Stebbing (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.cambridge.org/pan .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.