IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/vrs/offsta/v34y2018i2p341-364n4.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Combining Multiple Methods in Establishment Questionnaire Testing: The 2017 Census of Agriculture Testing Bento Box

Author

Listed:
  • McCarthy Jaki S.
  • Ott Kathleen
  • Ridolfo Heather
  • McGovern Pam
  • Sirkis Robyn

    (USDA – National Agricultural Statistics Service, 1400 Independence Ave., SW, Washington, DC20250, U.S.A.)

  • Moore Danna

    (Washington State University, Social and Economic Services, Pullman, WA99164-4014, U.S.A.)

Abstract

There are many methods that can be used to test questionnaires, each with its own strengths and weaknesses. The best approaches to questionnaire testing combine different methods to both broaden and strengthen the results. The US Census of Agriculture (COA) is conducted every five years and collects detailed information on agricultural production, inventories, practices, and operator demographics from agricultural establishments. Preceding each COA, evaluation and testing is done to test new items in the questionnaire and improve data quality for the subsequent COA. This article will describe how a multi-method approach, which we call Bento Box Testing, was applied to establishment questionnaire testing leading up to the 2017 COA. Testing included solicitation of expert opinion, historical data review, cognitive testing, a large scale field test, and qualitative follow-up interviews. The benefits of these testing methods, considerations for establishment survey testing, and how their results in combination provide a stronger evaluation are discussed.

Suggested Citation

  • McCarthy Jaki S. & Ott Kathleen & Ridolfo Heather & McGovern Pam & Sirkis Robyn & Moore Danna, 2018. "Combining Multiple Methods in Establishment Questionnaire Testing: The 2017 Census of Agriculture Testing Bento Box," Journal of Official Statistics, Sciendo, vol. 34(2), pages 341-364, June.
    • Handle: RePEc:vrs:offsta:v:34:y:2018:i:2:p:341-364:n:4
    DOI: 10.2478/jos-2018-0016
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.2478/jos-2018-0016
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.2478/jos-2018-0016?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
    ---><---

    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:34:y:2018:i:2:p:341-364:n:4. 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: 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.