IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/vrs/offsta/v30y2014i4p15n3.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

An Adaptive Data Collection Procedure for Call Prioritization

Author

Listed:
  • Beaumont Jean-Francois

    (Statistics Canada, 100 Tunney’s Pasture Driveway, R.H. Coats Bldg., 16-B Ottawa K1A 0T6, Canada.)

  • Bocci Cynthia

    (Statistics Canada, 100 Tunney’s Pasture Driveway, R.H. Coats Bldg., 18-E Ottawa K1A 0T6, Canada.)

  • Haziza David

    (Université de Montréal, Département de mathématiques et de statistique, Pavillon André Aisenstadt, Case postale 6128, Montre´al H3C 3J7, Canada.)

Abstract

We propose an adaptive data collection procedure for call prioritization in the context of computer-assisted telephone interview surveys. Our procedure is adaptive in the sense that the effort assigned to a sample unit may vary from one unit to another and may also vary during data collection. The goal of an adaptive procedure is usually to increase quality for a given cost or, alternatively, to reduce cost for a given quality. The quality criterion often considered in the literature is the nonresponse bias of an estimator that is not adjusted for nonresponse. Although the reduction of the nonresponse bias is a desirable goal, we argue that it is not a useful criterion to use at the data collection stage of a survey because the bias that can be removed at this stage through an adaptive collection procedure can also be removed at the estimation stage through appropriate nonresponse weight adjustments. Instead, we develop a procedure of call prioritization that, given the selected sample, attempts to minimize the conditional variance of a nonresponse-adjusted estimator subject to an overall budget constraint. We evaluate the performance of our procedure in a simulation study.

Suggested Citation

  • 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.
    • Handle: RePEc:vrs:offsta:v:30:y:2014:i:4:p:15:n:3
    DOI: 10.2478/jos-2014-0040
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.2478/jos-2014-0040
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.2478/jos-2014-0040?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. William Axinn & Cynthia Link & Robert Groves, 2011. "Responsive Survey Design, Demographic Data Collection, and Models of Demographic Behavior," Demography, Springer;Population Association of America (PAA), vol. 48(3), pages 1127-1149, August.
    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.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. 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.
    2. 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.
    3. Wagner James & West Brady T. & Elliott Michael R. & Coffey Stephanie, 2020. "Comparing the Ability of Regression Modeling and Bayesian Additive Regression Trees to Predict Costs in a Responsive Survey Design Context," Journal of Official Statistics, Sciendo, vol. 36(4), pages 907-931, December.
    4. Tobias Gummer & Pablo Christmann & Sascha Verhoeven & Christof Wolf, 2022. "Using a responsive survey design to innovate self‐administered mixed‐mode surveys," Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series A, Royal Statistical Society, vol. 185(3), pages 916-932, July.
    5. Ronald R. Rindfuss & Minja K. Choe & Noriko O. Tsuya & Larry L. Bumpass & Emi Tamaki, 2015. "Do low survey response rates bias results? Evidence from Japan," Demographic Research, Max Planck Institute for Demographic Research, Rostock, Germany, vol. 32(26), pages 797-828.
    6. Early Kirstin & Mankoff Jennifer & Fienberg Stephen E., 2017. "Dynamic Question Ordering in Online Surveys," Journal of Official Statistics, Sciendo, vol. 33(3), pages 625-657, September.
    7. Chun Asaph Young & Schouten Barry & Wagner James, 2017. "JOS Special Issue on Responsive and Adaptive Survey Design: Looking Back to See Forward – Editorial: In Memory of Professor Stephen E. Fienberg, 1942–2016," Journal of Official Statistics, Sciendo, vol. 33(3), pages 571-577, September.
    8. 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.
    9. 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.
    10. Lewis Taylor, 2017. "Univariate Tests for Phase Capacity: Tools for Identifying When to Modify a Survey’s Data Collection Protocol," Journal of Official Statistics, Sciendo, vol. 33(3), pages 601-624, September.
    11. 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.
    12. Andy Peytchev, 2013. "Consequences of Survey Nonresponse," The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, , vol. 645(1), pages 88-111, January.
    13. repec:iab:iabfda:201307(en is not listed on IDEAS
    14. 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.
    15. 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).
    16. Mario Callegaro & Charlotte Steeh & Trent D. Buskirk & Vasja Vehovar & Vesa Kuusela & Linda Piekarski, 2007. "Fitting disposition codes to mobile phone surveys: experiences from studies in Finland, Slovenia and the USA," Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series A, Royal Statistical Society, vol. 170(3), pages 647-670, July.
    17. 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.
    18. Raphael Nishimura & James Wagner & Michael Elliott, 2016. "Alternative Indicators for the Risk of Non-response Bias: A Simulation Study," International Statistical Review, International Statistical Institute, vol. 84(1), pages 43-62, April.
    19. G. Blom, Annelies, 2008. "Measuring nonresponse cross-nationally," ISER Working Paper Series 2008-41, Institute for Social and Economic Research.
    20. 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.
    21. Lipps Oliver & Voorpostel Marieke, 2020. "Can Interviewer Evaluations Predict Short-Term and Long-Term Participation in Telephone Panels?," Journal of Official Statistics, Sciendo, vol. 36(1), pages 117-136, March.

    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:vrs:offsta:v:30:y:2014:i:4:p:15:n:3. 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: Peter Golla (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.sciendo.com .

    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.