1 / 16

Matt Brown and Lisa Calderwood Centre for Longitudinal Studies

Sub-brand to go here. Want to be an Early Bird? Can encouraging respondents to contact interviewers to make appointments increase co-operation and save costs?. Matt Brown and Lisa Calderwood Centre for Longitudinal Studies. GSS Methodology Symposium – 27 th June.

paniz
Télécharger la présentation

Matt Brown and Lisa Calderwood Centre for Longitudinal Studies

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Sub-brand to go here Want to be an Early Bird? Can encouraging respondents to contact interviewers to make appointments increase co-operation and save costs? Matt Brown and Lisa Calderwood Centre for Longitudinal Studies GSS Methodology Symposium – 27th June CLS is an ESRC Resource Centre based at the Institute of Education

  2. Context • Survey costs increasing (Stoop, 2005) • Increased focus on cost-effectiveness • Main element of survey costs is fieldwork • Experiment conducted to attempt to reduce fieldwork costs by encouraging respondents to initiate contact with interviewers to arrange appointments

  3. Background • “Early Bird” innovation pioneered by National Longitudinal Studies – 1979 cohort • Respondents sent letter 2 weeks prior to fieldwork inviting them to call free telephone number to arrange appointment for interview. • W22 (2004): $60/$80 incentive paid if telephoned within 4 weeks of receiving letter (+ standard incentive ($40) for completing interview). • 49% took up offer • Some impact on response rates: • 80% overall • 83% amongst those offered Early Bird • Big impact on fieldwork effort: • 3 hours to complete interviewing for Early Birds • 5 hours to complete interviewing for ‘non’ Early Birds

  4. Research questions • Can this approach be successful on longitudinal studies in the UK context? • Incentives typical in household panel surveys but usually much lower value than US. • Can sample members be motivated to be ‘early-birds’ without a financial incentive? • Incentives unusual in cohort studies in the UK • Appeal to ‘helping’ tendencies (Groves, Cialdini and Couper, 1992) • Increasingly consumer-drive, time-poor society

  5. UKHLS • Understanding Society: UK Household Longitudinal Study (UKHLS) • 40,000 households • Experiment conducted on the ‘Innovation Panel’ – 1500 households • Develop and evaluate methodologies for longitudinal data collection • Open call for proposals to carry out experimental designs in a longitudinal context • A unique resource for methodological research.

  6. Experiment design

  7. Implementation • Two treatment groups sent letter three weeks before fieldwork • Next wave of study about to begin • “Opportunity to request an Early Bird Appointment by contacting interviewer on their mobile phone to arrange your interview at a time that suits you”. • Also sent a leaflet “Want to be an Early Bird?” which explained the offer (identical other than mention of incentive or appeal) • Given two weeks to contact interviewer to book an appointment for any date within first 4 weeks of data collection. (Interviewers all issued with mobile phones). • Control group just sent letter

  8. Results • Take-up of offer • Impact on response rate • Impact on fieldwork efficiency

  9. Results – take-up of offer

  10. Results – Response Rates

  11. Number of interviewer visits to complete all interviewing Results – Impact on fieldwork effort

  12. Total Number of Interviewer Visits – All issued households Results – Impact on fieldwork effort

  13. Early Bird Characteristics

  14. Summary and Conclusions • Low take-up rates: • Small incentive – in absolute terms? • Small increase in incentive relative to standard incentive? • Poor marketing? Emphasis on the term ‘Early-Bird’? • Materials not read • Mode effects – Face to face vs telephone? • Panel loyalty? • Take-up rate significantly higher if incentive offered • Appeal to ‘helping tendencies’ unsuccessful? • More emphasis on how beneficial to the respondent?

  15. Summary and Conclusions • When taken up EB leads to big reduction in interviewer visits needed to fully complete a case (as per NLSY) • Low take-up means little impact on overall fieldwork effort • Need to boost take-up rates • Higher incentive rates? • Better marketing of the EB offer?

  16. References • Groves, R.M., Cialdini, R.B. and Couper, M.P. (1992). Understanding the decision to participate in a survey. Public Opinion Quarterly, 56, 475-495 • Stoop, I. A. L. (2005). The Hunt for the Last Respondent: Nonresponse in sample surveys. The Hague: Social and Cultural Planning Office.

More Related