Understanding and Improving Response Rates in the Labour Force Survey: A Refusal Follow-Up Study
This report examines the declining response rates in the Labour Force Survey (LFS) and the associated data quality issues. Factors influencing response rates include interview length, external shocks, and changes in survey design. A refusal follow-up study was conducted to understand the characteristics of non-respondents and their reasons for refusal. The study aims to assess non-response bias and enhance fieldwork strategies. Key findings show that non-response can significantly impact estimates related to ethnicity and household type. Recommendations for improvement include interviewer training and incentivizing participation.
Understanding and Improving Response Rates in the Labour Force Survey: A Refusal Follow-Up Study
E N D
Presentation Transcript
The Labour Force Survey – Data Quality Issues Matthew Steel
Data Quality Issues • Response rates • Factors • Improving response • Research • Refusal follow-up study • Future work
Factors affecting response • Falling contact rates • Increasing interview length • Respondents less willing • External shocks • Reduced budgets • Change in survey design
Improving response • Interviewer training • Incentives • Questionnaire reviews • Varying calling patterns • Survey materials • IT infrastructure
Research • Analysis of attrition bias • Analysis on key estimates • Analysis of paradata • Refusal follow-up study
Refusal follow-up study - Introduction Study:Eurostat funded project - result of one of the recommendations of the Quality Task Force Review of the LFS, to collect information on the characteristics of non-respondents in order to assess and adjust for non-response bias and to improve fieldwork strategies. Issue • Declining response rates: - August 2011 64% response rate at wave 1 - 10 years ago 75% in wave 1 • Key LFS estimates - sensitive to ethnicity, household type and nationalityBut – these are not included in the calibration totals
Refusal follow-up study - Introduction • Therefore, if achieved sample proportions of…- ethnic groups- household groups- national groups… …are not representative of those proportions in…- allocated sample - population… …then the estimates derived from the LFS may be biased. • RFU survey aimed to:- identify whether key characteristics of responders and non-responders differentiate- identify if RFU group reasons for refusal differ to general refusing group
Refusal follow-up study – Data Collection Mainstage RFU exercise:- Main and boost LFS survey - Wave 1 and outright/HQ refusals only- April to June 2011 LFS questionnaire Data collected in 4 ways… • Face-to-face • Telephone Unit (wave 1) • Survey Enquiry Line (SEL) • Self completion Face-to-face (left at doorstep) SEL (posted to respondent) Questionnaire process:- Interviewer/ SEL attempt achieve LFS interview- Not possible, offer RFU as last resort
Refusal follow-up study – Response Rate • Total AJ11 outright refusals and HQ refusals = 4,137 • LFS RFU respondents = 787 • LFS RFU response rate = 19 % • ONS received responses from each of the 4 methods • No interviewer estimate data was allowed, for:- Ethical reasons- Accuracy/ validity reasons
Refusal follow-up study – Analysis • LFS collected data on all members of household • LFS RFU collected data:- Fully on one member of household - Partially on all other members • Therefore, comparisons between LFS and LFS RFU enabled by…- Selection of one random adult from each LFS responding household- Selection of full data respondent from LFS RFU- Created analysis dataset containing both
Refusal follow-up study – Reasons for refusal Percentage comparison of reasons for RFU and LFS
Refusal follow-up study - Characteristic comparisons of LFS and RFU respondents Age
Refusal follow-up study - Characteristic comparisons of LFS and RFU respondents Sex
Refusal follow-up study - Characteristic comparisons of LFS and RFU respondents Nationality
Refusal follow-up study - Characteristic comparisons of LFS and RFU respondents Ethnicity
Refusal follow-up study - Characteristic comparisons of LFS and RFU respondents Household type
Refusal follow-up study - Characteristic comparisons of LFS and RFU respondents Workless households
Refusal follow-up study - bias • Aim? - to determine whether bias exists in LFS data • How?- Created 1 weight for LFS responders and RFU combined dataset, and - Created 1 weight for LFS responders dataset only (excluding RFU cases) • Analysis?- Investigated whether proportions in data differed when RFU group included
This indicates:- potential bias in the current estimates from a sample that included these ‘refusers’ in the LFS - or that the current LFS estimates are themselves potentially biased. Refusal follow-up study – bias investigations
Refusal follow-up study - Caveats • LFSRFU data collected from one adult per residence • LFSRFU sample may not be representative of all ‘refusers’ to LFS • Not possible to produce standard errors in comparing the two weighted datasets.
Future work • Continue to monitor • Census non-response link study • Regularly review length of survey • Data collection modes • Non-response weights
Contact details LFS Research Team: nina.parry-langdon@ons.gsi.gov.uk debra.leaker@ons.gsi.gov.uk matthew.steel@ons.gsi.gov.uk Social Survey Data Service: socialsurveys@ons.gsi.gov.uk