DOCSLIB.ORG

The Future of Survey Research: Challenges and Opportunities

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
The Future of Survey Research: Challenges and Opportunities The Future of Survey Research: Challenges and Opportunities A Report to the National Science Foundation Based on Two Conferences Held on October 3-4 and November 8-9, 2012 Report Presented By The National Science Foundation Advisory Committee for the Social, Behavioral and Economic Sciences Subcommittee on Advancing SBE Survey Research: Jon A. Krosnick – Stanford University (chair) Stanley Presser – University of Maryland Kaye Husbands Fealing – University of Minnesota Steven Ruggles – University of Minnesota Project Coordinator: David L. Vannette – Stanford University When the National Science Foundation Advisory Committee for the Social, Behavioral and Economic Sciences formed the subcommittee on Advancing SBE Survey Research, Janet Harkness was a member. We dedicate this report to her memory, to recognize her contribution to this subcommittee and the survey research community and the work of the National Science Foundation. Any opinions, findings, conclusions or recommendations presented in this material are only those of the authors; and do not necessarily reflect the views of the National Science Foundation. May, 2015 Table of Contents TABLE OF CONTENTS ....................................................................................................................................... 2 OVERVIEW ............................................................................................................................................................. 4 SECTION 1 – BEST PRACTICES FOR SURVEY RESEARCH .................................................................................................. 6 SECTION 2 – RECOMMENDATIONS ............................................................................................................... 12 CONCLUDING REMARKS – WAYS FORWARD FOR NSF ........................................................................................... 13 REFERENCES: .................................................................................................................................................................... 14 APPENDIX: ........................................................................................................................................................... 18 DOCUMENTATION OF CONFERENCES ................................................................................................. 18 BACKGROUND ................................................................................................................................................... 18 PRESENTERS ...................................................................................................................................................... 22 SUMMARIES OF PRESENTATIONS ........................................................................................................... 34 SECTION 1: CONVENTIONAL SURVEY RESEARCH .................................................................................................... 34 Reasons for Optimism about the Accuracy of Survey Research – Jon A. Krosnick ................................... 34 Probability vs. Non-probability Sampling Methods – Gary Langer ................................................................ 35 Sampling for Single and Multi-Mode Surveys using Address-based Sampling - Colm O’Muircheartaigh ................................................................................................................................................................. 39 The Impact of Survey Nonresponse on Survey Accuracy – Scott Keeter ........................................................ 42 Optimizing Response Rates – J. Michael Brick ........................................................................................................ 44 Modes of Data Collection – Roger Tourangeau ....................................................................................................... 47 The Use and Effects of Incentives in Surveys – Eleanor Singer ......................................................................... 53 Building Household Rosters Sensibly – Kathleen T. Ashenfelter ...................................................................... 59 Proxy Reporting – Curtiss Cobb ..................................................................................................................................... 64 Improving Question Design to Maximize Reliability and Validity – Jon A. Krosnick .............................. 67 Perception of Visual Displays and Survey Navigation – Stephen Kosslyn .................................................... 71 Cognitive Evaluation of Survey Instruments: State of the Science and Future Directions – Gordon Willis ........................................................................................................................................................................................... 74 Survey Interviewing: Deviations from the Script – Nora Cate Schaeffer ...................................................... 77 Challenges and Opportunities in Open-Ended Coding – Arthur Lupia ......................................................... 85 What Human Language Technology can do for you (and vice versa) – Mark Liberman ....................... 90 Confidentiality and Anonymity – Roger Tourangeau ............................................................................................. 93 Respondent Attrition vs. Data Attrition and Their Reduction - Randall J. Olsen ....................................... 97 Computation of Survey Weights – Matthew DeBell ................................................................................................ 99 SECTION 2: OPPORTUNITIES TO EXPAND DATA COLLECTION .......................................................................... 102 Paradata – Frauke Kreuter ............................................................................................................................................ 102 Interviewer Observations – Brady T. West .............................................................................................................. 106 Leave-behind Measurement Supplements – Michael W. Link ......................................................................... 109 Experience Sampling and Ecological Momentary Assessment – Arthur A. Stone .................................. 110 Biomarkers in Representative Population Surveys – David Weir .................................................................. 114 Specialized Tools for Measuring Past Events – Robert Belli ........................................................................... 117 SECTION 3: LINKING SURVEY DATA WITH EXTERNAL SOURCES .................................................................... 121 Linking Survey Data to Official Government Records – Joseph W. Sakshaug ......................................... 121 Linking Knowledge Networks Web Panel Data with External Data – Josh Pasek ................................. 123 2 Linking Survey Data with the Catalist Commercial Database – Bob Blaemire ...................................... 125 Election Administration Data – Michael P. McDonald ..................................................................................... 126 Challenges with Validating Survey Data – Matthew K. Berent ...................................................................... 128 Improving Government, Academic and Industry Data-Sharing Opportunities – Robert Groves ..... 130 SECTION 4: IMPROVING RESEARCH TRANSPARENCY AND DATA DISSEMINATION ................................... 132 Data Curation – Steven Ruggles .................................................................................................................................. 132 Evaluating the Usability of Survey Project Websites – David L. Vannette ................................................ 135 Research Transparency and the Credibility of Survey-Based Social Science - Arthur Lupia............ 139 CONFERENCE WEBSITE AND ORGANIZER CONTACT INFORMATION .............................. 142 LIST OF CONFERENCE PRESENTERS .................................................................................................. 143 LIST OF CONFERENCE DISCUSSANTS ................................................................................................. 144 CONFERENCE PROGRAMS ........................................................................................................................ 145 3 Overview For more than thirty years, the National Science Foundation (NSF) has supported data for research on a wide variety of topics by making awards to three major long-term survey efforts, the American National Elections Studies (ANES), the Panel Study of Income Dynamics (PSID), and the General Social Survey (GSS). In February 2012, the Advisory Committee for the Social, Behavioral, and Economic Sciences (SBE) was asked to provide advice about future investments in these surveys and others. The Advisory Committee then charged a subcommittee to provide that advice. The Subcommittee on Advancing SBE Survey Research is comprised of Jon Krosnick (Stanford University, chair), Janet Harkness (University of Nebraska, deceased), Kaye Husbands-Fealing (University of Minnesota), Stanley Presser (University of Maryland), and Steven Ruggles (University of Minnesota). The Subcommittee submits this report to the Assistant Director of the SBE Directorate, with the purpose of providing advice related to how the Foundation can best use its resources to support research through survey
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Political Socialization, Public Opinion, and Polling
    Political Socialization, Public Opinion, and Polling asic Tenants of American olitical Culture iberty/Freedom People should be free to live their lives with minimal governmental interference quality Political, legal, & of opportunity, but not economic equality ndividualism Responsibility for own decisions emocracy Consent of the governed Majority rule, with minority rights Citizen responsibilities (voting, jury duty, etc.) olitical Culture vs. Ideology Most Americans share common beliefs in he democratic foundation of government culture) yet have differing opinions on the proper role & scope of government ideology) olitical Socialization Process through which an individual acquires particular political orientations, beliefs, and values at factors influence political opinion mation? Family #1 source for political identification Between 60-70% of all children agree with their parents upon reaching adulthood. If one switches his/her party affiliation it usually goes from Republican/Democrat to independent hat factors influence political opinion mation? School/level of education “Building good citizens”- civic education reinforces views about participation Pledge of Allegiance Volunteering Civic pride is nation wide Informed student-citizens are more likely to participate/vote as adults Voting patterns based on level of educational attainment hat factors influence political opinion rmation? Peer group/occupation Increases in importance during teen years Occupational influences hat factors influence political opinion mation? Mass media Impact
    [Show full text]
  • On Becoming a Pragmatic Researcher: the Importance of Combining Quantitative and Qualitative Research Methodologies
    DOCUMENT RESUME ED 482 462 TM 035 389 AUTHOR Onwuegbuzie, Anthony J.; Leech, Nancy L. TITLE On Becoming a Pragmatic Researcher: The Importance of Combining Quantitative and Qualitative Research Methodologies. PUB DATE 2003-11-00 NOTE 25p.; Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the Mid-South Educational Research Association (Biloxi, MS, November 5-7, 2003). PUB TYPE Reports Descriptive (141) Speeches/Meeting Papers (150) EDRS PRICE EDRS Price MF01/PCO2 Plus Postage. DESCRIPTORS *Pragmatics; *Qualitative Research; *Research Methodology; *Researchers ABSTRACT The last 100 years have witnessed a fervent debate in the United States about quantitative and qualitative research paradigms. Unfortunately, this has led to a great divide between quantitative and qualitative researchers, who often view themselves in competition with each other. Clearly, this polarization has promoted purists, i.e., researchers who restrict themselves exclusively to either quantitative or qualitative research methods. Mono-method research is the biggest threat to the advancement of the social sciences. As long as researchers stay polarized in research they cannot expect stakeholders who rely on their research findings to take their work seriously. The purpose of this paper is to explore how the debate between quantitative and qualitative is divisive, and thus counterproductive for advancing the social and behavioral science field. This paper advocates that all graduate students learn to use and appreciate both quantitative and qualitative research. In so doing, students will develop into what is termed "pragmatic researchers." (Contains 41 references.) (Author/SLD) Reproductions supplied by EDRS are the best that can be made from the original document. On Becoming a Pragmatic Researcher 1 Running head: ON BECOMING A PRAGMATIC RESEARCHER U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • E-Survey Methodology
    Chapter I E-Survey Methodology Karen J. Jansen The Pennsylvania State University, USA Kevin G. Corley Arizona State University, USA Bernard J. Jansen The Pennsylvania State University, USA ABSTRACT With computer network access nearly ubiquitous in much of the world, alternative means of data col- lection are being made available to researchers. Recent studies have explored various computer-based techniques (e.g., electronic mail and Internet surveys). However, exploitation of these techniques requires careful consideration of conceptual and methodological issues associated with their use. We identify and explore these issues by defining and developing a typology of “e-survey” techniques in organiza- tional research. We examine the strengths, weaknesses, and threats to reliability, validity, sampling, and generalizability of these approaches. We conclude with a consideration of emerging issues of security, privacy, and ethics associated with the design and implications of e-survey methodology. INTRODUCTION 1999; Oppermann, 1995; Saris, 1991). Although research over the past 15 years has been mixed on For the researcher considering the use of elec- the realization of these benefits (Kiesler & Sproull, tronic surveys, there is a rapidly growing body of 1986; Mehta & Sivadas, 1995; Sproull, 1986; Tse, literature addressing design issues and providing Tse, Yin, Ting, Yi, Yee, & Hong, 1995), for the laundry lists of costs and benefits associated with most part, researchers agree that faster response electronic survey techniques (c.f., Lazar & Preece, times and decreased costs are attainable benefits, 1999; Schmidt, 1997; Stanton, 1998). Perhaps the while response rates differ based on variables three most common reasons for choosing an e-sur- beyond administration mode alone.
    [Show full text]
  • Questionnaire Design Guidelines for Establishment Surveys
    Journal of Official Statistics, Vol. 26, No. 1, 2010, pp. 43–85 Questionnaire Design Guidelines for Establishment Surveys Rebecca L. Morrison1, Don A. Dillman2, and Leah M. Christian3 Previous literature has shown the effects of question wording or visual design on the data provided by respondents. However, few articles have been published that link the effects of question wording and visual design to the development of questionnaire design guidelines. This article proposes specific guidelines for the design of establishment surveys within statistical agencies based on theories regarding communication and visual perception, experimental research on question wording and visual design, and findings from cognitive interviews with establishment survey respondents. The guidelines are applicable to both paper and electronic instruments, and cover such topics as the phrasing of questions, the use of space, the placement and wording of instructions, the design of answer spaces, and matrices. Key words: Visual design; question wording; cognitive interviews. 1. Introduction In recent years, considerable effort has been made to develop questionnaire construction guidelines for how questions should appear in establishment surveys. Examples include guidelines developed by the Australian Bureau of Statistics (2006) and Statistics Norway (Nøtnæs 2006). These guidelines have utilized the rapidly emerging research on how the choice of survey mode, question wording, and visual layout influence respondent answers, in order to improve the quality of responses and to encourage similarity of construction when more than one survey data collection mode is used. Redesign efforts for surveys at the Central Bureau of Statistics in the Netherlands (Snijkers 2007), Statistics Denmark (Conrad 2007), and the Office for National Statistics in the United Kingdom (Jones et al.
    [Show full text]
  • Springer Journal Collection in Humanities, Social Sciences &
    ABCD springer.com Springer Journal Collection in Humanities, Social Sciences & Law TOP QUALITY More than With over 260 journals, the Springer Humanities, and edited by internationally respected Social Sciences and Law program serves scientists, researchers and academics from 260 Journals research and academic communities around the world-leading institutions and corporations. globe, covering the fields of Philosophy, Law, Most of the journals are indexed by major Sociology, Linguistics, Education, Anthropology abstracting services. Articles are searchable & Archaeology, (Applied) Ethics, Criminology by subject, publication title, topic, author or & Criminal Justice and Population Studies. keywords on SpringerLink, the world’s most Springer journals are recognized as a source for comprehensive online collection of scientific, high-quality, specialized content across a broad technological and medical journals, books and range of interests. All journals are peer-reviewed reference works. Main Disciplines: Most Downloaded Journals in this Collection Archaeology IF 5 Year IF Education and Language 7 Journal of Business Ethics 1.125 1.603 Ethics 7 Synthese 0.676 0.783 7 Higher Education 0.823 1.249 Law 7 Early Childhood Education Journal Philosophy 7 Philosophical Studies Sociology 7 Educational Studies in Mathematics 7 ETR&D - Educational Technology Research and Development 1.081 1.770 7 Social Indicators Research 1.000 1.239 Society Partners 7 Research in Higher Education 1.221 1.585 Include: 7 Agriculture and Human Values 1.054 1.466 UNESCO 7 International Review of Education Population Association 7 Research in Science Education 0.853 1.112 of America 7 Biology & Philosophy 0.829 1.299 7 Journal of Happiness Studies 2.104 Society for Community Research and Action All Impact Factors are from 2010 Journal Citation Reports® − Thomson Reuters.
    [Show full text]
  • How Can Citation Impact in Bibliometrics Be Normalized?
    RESEARCH ARTICLE How can citation impact in bibliometrics be normalized? A new approach combining citing-side normalization and citation percentiles an open access journal Lutz Bornmann Division for Science and Innovation Studies, Administrative Headquarters of the Max Planck Society, Hofgartenstr. 8, 80539 Munich, Germany Downloaded from http://direct.mit.edu/qss/article-pdf/1/4/1553/1871000/qss_a_00089.pdf by guest on 01 October 2021 Keywords: bibliometrics, citation analysis, citation percentiles, citing-side normalization Citation: Bornmann, L. (2020). How can citation impact in bibliometrics be normalized? A new approach ABSTRACT combining citing-side normalization and citation percentiles. Quantitative Since the 1980s, many different methods have been proposed to field-normalize citations. In this Science Studies, 1(4), 1553–1569. https://doi.org/10.1162/qss_a_00089 study, an approach is introduced that combines two previously introduced methods: citing-side DOI: normalization and citation percentiles. The advantage of combining two methods is that their https://doi.org/10.1162/qss_a_00089 advantages can be integrated in one solution. Based on citing-side normalization, each citation Received: 8 May 2020 is field weighted and, therefore, contextualized in its field. The most important advantage of Accepted: 30 July 2020 citing-side normalization is that it is not necessary to work with a specific field categorization scheme for the normalization procedure. The disadvantages of citing-side normalization—the Corresponding Author: Lutz Bornmann calculation is complex and the numbers are elusive—can be compensated for by calculating [email protected] percentiles based on weighted citations that result from citing-side normalization. On the one Handling Editor: hand, percentiles are easy to understand: They are the percentage of papers published in the Ludo Waltman same year with a lower citation impact.
    [Show full text]
  • Census: Planning Ahead for 2020
    S. Hrg. 112–676 CENSUS: PLANNING AHEAD FOR 2020 HEARING BEFORE THE FEDERAL FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT, GOVERNMENT INFORMATION, FEDERAL SERVICES, AND INTERNATIONAL SECURITY SUBCOMMITTEE OF THE COMMITTEE ON HOMELAND SECURITY AND GOVERNMENTAL AFFAIRS UNITED STATES SENATE ONE HUNDRED TWELFTH CONGRESS SECOND SESSION JULY 18, 2012 Available via the World Wide Web: http://www.fdsys.gov Printed for the use of the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs ( U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 76–063 PDF WASHINGTON : 2013 For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov Phone: toll free (866) 512–1800; DC area (202) 512–1800 Fax: (202) 512–2104 Mail: Stop IDCC, Washington, DC 20402–0001 COMMITTEE ON HOMELAND SECURITY AND GOVERNMENTAL AFFAIRS JOSEPH I. LIEBERMAN, Connecticut, Chairman CARL LEVIN, Michigan SUSAN M. COLLINS, Maine DANIEL K. AKAKA, Hawaii TOM COBURN, Oklahoma THOMAS R. CARPER, Delaware SCOTT P. BROWN, Massachusetts MARK L. PRYOR, Arkansas JOHN MCCAIN, Arizona MARY L. LANDRIEU, Louisiana RON JOHNSON, Wisconsin CLAIRE MCCASKILL, Missouri ROB PORTMAN, Ohio JON TESTER, Montana RAND PAUL, Kentucky MARK BEGICH, Alaska JERRY MORAN, Kansas MICHAEL L. ALEXANDER, Staff Director NICHOLAS A. ROSSI, Minority Staff Director TRINA DRIESSNACK TYRER, Chief Clerk JOYCE WARD, Publications Clerk and GPO Detailee SUBCOMMITTEE ON FEDERAL FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT, GOVERNMENT INFORMATION, FEDERAL SERVICES, AND INTERNATIONAL SECURITY THOMAS R. CARPER, Delaware, Chairman CARL LEVIN, Michigan SCOTT P. BROWN, Massachusetts DANIEL K. AKAKA, Hawaii TOM COBURN, Oklahoma MARK L. PRYOR, Arkansas JOHN MCCAIN, Arizona CLAIRE MCCASKILL, Missouri RON JOHNSON, Wisconsin MARK BEGICH, Alaska ROB PORTMAN, Ohio JOHN KILVINGTON, Staff Director WILLIAM WRIGHT, Minority Staff Director DEIRDRE G.
    [Show full text]
  • Jon Krosnick Frederic O
    Jon Krosnick Frederic O. Glover Professor of Humanities and Social Sciences, Professor of Communication and of Political Science and, by courtesy, of Psychology Curriculum Vitae available Online Bio BIO Jon Krosnick is a social psychologist who does research on attitude formation, change, and effects, on the psychology of political behavior, and on survey research methods. He is the Frederic O. Glover Professor in Humanities and Social Sciences, Professor of Communication, Political Science, and (by courtesy) Psychology. At Stanford, in addition to his professorships, he directs the Political Psychology Research Group and the Summer Institute in Political Psychology. To read reports on Professor Krosnick’s research program exploring public opinion on the environment visit the Woods Institute for the Environment and the Public Opinion on Climate Change web sites. Research Interests Author of four books and more than 140 articles and chapters, Dr. Krosnick conducts research in three primary areas: (1) attitude formation, change, and effects, (2) the psychology of political behavior, and (3) the optimal design of questionnaires used for laboratory experiments and surveys, and survey research methodology more generally. His attitude research has focused primarily on the notion of attitude strength, seeking to differentiate attitudes that are firmly crystallized and powerfully influential of thinking and action from attitudes that are flexible and inconsequential. Many of his studies in this area have focused on the amount of personal importance that an individual chooses to attach to an attitude. Dr. Krosnick’s studies have illuminated the origins of attitude importance (e.g., material self-interest and values) and the cognitive and behavioral consequences of importance in regulating attitude impact and attitude change processes.
    [Show full text]
  • Summary of Human Subjects Protection Issues Related to Large Sample Surveys
    Summary of Human Subjects Protection Issues Related to Large Sample Surveys U.S. Department of Justice Bureau of Justice Statistics Joan E. Sieber June 2001, NCJ 187692 U.S. Department of Justice Office of Justice Programs John Ashcroft Attorney General Bureau of Justice Statistics Lawrence A. Greenfeld Acting Director Report of work performed under a BJS purchase order to Joan E. Sieber, Department of Psychology, California State University at Hayward, Hayward, California 94542, (510) 538-5424, e-mail [email protected]. The author acknowledges the assistance of Caroline Wolf Harlow, BJS Statistician and project monitor. Ellen Goldberg edited the document. Contents of this report do not necessarily reflect the views or policies of the Bureau of Justice Statistics or the Department of Justice. This report and others from the Bureau of Justice Statistics are available through the Internet — http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs Table of Contents 1. Introduction 2 Limitations of the Common Rule with respect to survey research 2 2. Risks and benefits of participation in sample surveys 5 Standard risk issues, researcher responses, and IRB requirements 5 Long-term consequences 6 Background issues 6 3. Procedures to protect privacy and maintain confidentiality 9 Standard issues and problems 9 Confidentiality assurances and their consequences 21 Emerging issues of privacy and confidentiality 22 4. Other procedures for minimizing risks and promoting benefits 23 Identifying and minimizing risks 23 Identifying and maximizing possible benefits 26 5. Procedures for responding to requests for help or assistance 28 Standard procedures 28 Background considerations 28 A specific recommendation: An experiment within the survey 32 6.
    [Show full text]
  • Survey Experiments
    IU Workshop in Methods – 2019 Survey Experiments Testing Causality in Diverse Samples Trenton D. Mize Department of Sociology & Advanced Methodologies (AMAP) Purdue University Survey Experiments Page 1 Survey Experiments Page 2 Contents INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................................................................................ 8 Overview .............................................................................................................................................................................. 8 What is a survey experiment? .................................................................................................................................... 9 What is an experiment?.............................................................................................................................................. 10 Independent and dependent variables ................................................................................................................. 11 Experimental Conditions ............................................................................................................................................. 12 WHY CONDUCT A SURVEY EXPERIMENT? ........................................................................................................................... 13 Internal, external, and construct validity ..........................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Mhra Style Guide for School of English Students
    MHRA STYLE GUIDE FOR SCHOOL OF ENGLISH STUDENTS INTRODUCTORY VERSION ENGLISH LITERATURE PROGRAMME (Footnote Style) ENGLISH LANGUAGE AND LINGUISTICS PROGRAMME (Author Date Style) English Literature Modules What do you want to produce? A citation to be placed in a footnote A reference to a book A reference to a chapter in a book A reference to an article in a journal A bibliography entry A reference to a book A reference to a chapter in a book A reference to an article in a journal If your source is a book prepare your FOOTNOTE citation exactly as follows Joe Bray, The Epistolary Novel: Representations of Consciousness (London: Routledge, 2003), p. 30. Things to get right, in order: • Author’s name as it appears on the book’s titlepage, followed by comma and a space • Full title of the book, in italics, with capital letters where appropriate, then a space • Brackets containing the publisher data with exact punctuation as follows -- (City: Publisher, Year) • These brackets are followed by a comma, then a space • The page number of your citation displayed accurately: p. followed by a space then the number. More than one page is presented like this: pp. 230-31 • Finish footnotes with a full stop. table of contents If your source is a titled essay in a book prepare your FOOTNOTE citation exactly as follows: Sue Owen, 'The Lost Rhetoric of Liberty: Marvell and Restoration Drama', in Marvell and Liberty, ed. by W. Chernaik and M. Dzelzainis (Basingstoke: Macmillan, 1999), pp. 334-53 (p. 334). Things to get right, in order: • Author’s name as it appears on the essay’s titlepage, followed by comma and a space • Full title of the article, in single inverted commas, with capital letters where appropriate, then a comma and the word in • Full title of the book in italics followed by a comma and the phrase ed.
    [Show full text]
  • Interactive Voice Response for Data Collection in Low and Middle-Income Countries
    Interactive Voice Response for Data Collection in Low and Middle-Income Countries Viamo Brief April 2018 Suggested Citation Greenleaf, A.R. Vogel, L. 2018. Interactive Voice Response for Data Collection in Low and Middle- Income Countries. Toronto, Canada: Viamo. 1 0 - EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Expanding mobile network coverage, decreasing cost of cellphones and airtime, and a more literate population have made mobile phone surveys an increasingly viable option for data collection in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). Interactive voice response (IVR) is a fast and cost-effective option for survey data collection. The benefits of trying to reach respondents in low and middle-income countries (LMICs) via cell phone have been described by The World Bank,[1] academics[2,3], and practitioners[4] alike. IVR, a faster and less expensive option than face-to-face surveys, can collect data in areas that are difficult for human interviewers to reach. This brief explains applications of IVR for data collection in LMICs. Sections 1- 4 provide background information about IVR and detail the advantages of “robo-calls”. The next three sections explain the three main target groups for IVR. Beginning with Section 5 we outline the four approaches to sampling a general population and address IVR data quality. Known respondents, who are often enrolled for monitoring and evaluation, are covered in Section 6, along with best practices for maximizing participant engagement. Finally, in Section 7 we explain how professionals use IVR for surveillance and reporting. Woven throughout Sections 5-7, four case studies illustrate how four organizations have successfully used IVR to for data collection.
    [Show full text]