IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/anname/v645y2013i1p222-236.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Where Do We Go from Here? Nonresponse and Social Measurement

Author

Listed:
  • Douglas S. Massey
  • Roger Tourangeau

Abstract

Surveys undergird government statistical systems and social scientific research throughout the world. Rates of nonresponse are rising in cross-sectional surveys (those conducted during a fixed period of time and not repeated). Although this trend worries those concerned with the validity of survey data, there is no necessary relationship between the rate of nonresponse and the degree of bias. A high rate of nonresponse merely creates the potential for bias, but the degree of bias depends on how factors promoting nonresponse are related to variables of interest. Nonresponse can be reduced by offering financial incentives to respondents and by careful design before entering the field, creating a trade-off between cost and potential bias. When bias is suspected, it can be countered by weighting individual cases by the inverse of their response propensity. Response propensities are typically estimated using a logistic regression equation to predict the dichotomous outcome of survey participation as a function of auxiliary variables. The Multi-level Integrated Database Approach employs multiple databases to collect as much information as possible about the target sample during the initial sampling stage and at all possible levels of aggregation to maximize the accuracy of estimated response propensities.

Suggested Citation

  • Douglas S. Massey & Roger Tourangeau, 2013. "Where Do We Go from Here? Nonresponse and Social Measurement," The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, , vol. 645(1), pages 222-236, January.
  • Handle: RePEc:sae:anname:v:645:y:2013:i:1:p:222-236
    DOI: 10.1177/0002716212464191
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0002716212464191
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/0002716212464191?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. repec:mpr:mprres:4937 is not listed on IDEAS
    2. Robert M. Groves & Steven G. Heeringa, 2006. "Responsive design for household surveys: tools for actively controlling survey errors and costs," Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series A, Royal Statistical Society, vol. 169(3), pages 439-457, July.
    3. repec:mpr:mprres:4780 is not listed on IDEAS
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Winnie S Chow & Jan Schmidtke & Adrian Loerbroks & Thomas Muth & Peter Angerer, 2018. "The Relationship between Personality Traits with Depressive Symptoms and Suicidal Ideation among Medical Students: A Cross-Sectional Study at One Medical School in Germany," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 15(7), pages 1-11, July.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Reza C. Daniels, 2012. "A Framework for Investigating Micro Data Quality, with Application to South African Labour Market Household Surveys," SALDRU Working Papers 90, Southern Africa Labour and Development Research Unit, University of Cape Town.
    2. Reist, Benjamin M. & Rodhouse, Joseph B. & Ball, Shane T. & Young, Linda J., 2019. "Subsampling of Nonrespondents in the 2017 Census of Agriculture," NASS Research Reports 322826, United States Department of Agriculture, National Agricultural Statistics Service.
    3. Jiayun Jin & Caroline Vandenplas & Geert Loosveldt, 2019. "The Evaluation of Statistical Process Control Methods to Monitor Interview Duration During Survey Data Collection," SAGE Open, , vol. 9(2), pages 21582440198, June.
    4. Roger Tourangeau & J. Michael Brick & Sharon Lohr & Jane Li, 2017. "Adaptive and responsive survey designs: a review and assessment," Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series A, Royal Statistical Society, vol. 180(1), pages 203-223, January.
    5. repec:iab:iabfda:201307(en is not listed on IDEAS
    6. Roberts Caroline & Herzing Jessica M.E. & Vandenplas Caroline, 2020. "A Validation of R-Indicators as a Measure of the Risk of Bias using Data from a Nonresponse Follow-Up Survey," Journal of Official Statistics, Sciendo, vol. 36(3), pages 675-701, September.
    7. Böhme, Marcus & Stöhr, Tobias, 2012. "Guidelines for the use of household interview duration analysis in CAPI survey management," Kiel Working Papers 1779, Kiel Institute for the World Economy (IfW Kiel).
    8. Durrant Gabriele B. & Maslovskaya Olga & Smith Peter W. F., 2017. "Using Prior Wave Information and Paradata: Can They Help to Predict Response Outcomes and Call Sequence Length in a Longitudinal Study?," Journal of Official Statistics, Sciendo, vol. 33(3), pages 801-833, September.
    9. Holly Matulewicz & Eric Grau & Arif Mamun & Gina Livermore, "undated". "Promoting Readiness of Minors in Supplemental Security Income (PROMISE): PROMISE 60-Month Sampling and Survey Plan," Mathematica Policy Research Reports be402161c12e402392af9182e, Mathematica Policy Research.
    10. Sofie Marien & Marc Hooghe & Ellen Quintelier, 2010. "Inequalities in Non‐institutionalised Forms of Political Participation: A Multi‐level Analysis of 25 countries," Political Studies, Political Studies Association, vol. 58(1), pages 187-213, February.
    11. Willems, Jurgen, 2015. "Individual perceptions on the participant and societal functionality of non-formal education for youth: Explaining differences across countries based on the human development index," International Journal of Educational Development, Elsevier, vol. 44(C), pages 11-20.
    12. Stephanie Coffey, PhD. & Jaya Damineni & John Eltinge, PhD. & Anup Mathur, PhD. & Kayla Varela & Allison Zotti, 2023. "Some Open Questions on Multiple-Source Extensions of Adaptive-Survey Design Concepts and Methods," Working Papers 23-03, Center for Economic Studies, U.S. Census Bureau.
    13. Durrant, Gabriele B. & D'Arrigo, Julia & Steele, Fiona, 2011. "Using field process data to predict best times of contact conditioning on household and interviewer influences," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 52201, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    14. Heng Chen & Geoffrey Dunbar & Q. Rallye Shen, 2020. "The Mode is the Message: Using Predata as Exclusion Restrictions to Evaluate Survey Design," Advances in Econometrics, in: Essays in Honor of Cheng Hsiao, volume 41, pages 341-357, Emerald Group Publishing Limited.
    15. Thompson Katherine Jenny & Kaputa Stephen J., 2017. "Investigating Adaptive Nonresponse Follow-up Strategies for Small Businesses through Embedded Experiments," Journal of Official Statistics, Sciendo, vol. 33(3), pages 835-856, September.
    16. Beaumont Jean-Francois & Bocci Cynthia & Haziza David, 2014. "An Adaptive Data Collection Procedure for Call Prioritization," Journal of Official Statistics, Sciendo, vol. 30(4), pages 1-15, December.
    17. Lynn, Peter & Jäckle, Annette & G. Blom, Annelies, 2008. "Understanding cross-national differences in unit non-response: the role of contact data," ISER Working Paper Series 2008-01, Institute for Social and Economic Research.
    18. J. N. K. Rao, 2021. "On Making Valid Inferences by Integrating Data from Surveys and Other Sources," Sankhya B: The Indian Journal of Statistics, Springer;Indian Statistical Institute, vol. 83(1), pages 242-272, May.
    19. Lundquist Peter & Särndal Carl-Erik, 2013. "Aspects of Responsive Design with Applications to the Swedish Living Conditions Survey," Journal of Official Statistics, Sciendo, vol. 29(4), pages 557-582, December.
    20. Gonzalez Jeffrey M. & Eltinge John L., 2016. "Discussion," Journal of Official Statistics, Sciendo, vol. 32(2), pages 295-300, June.
    21. Schouten, Barry & Shlomo, Natalie & Skinner, Chris J., 2011. "Indicators for monitoring and improving representativeness of response," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 39121, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.

    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:sae:anname:v:645:y:2013:i:1:p:222-236. 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.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with 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: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    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.