Fitting disposition codes to mobile phone surveys: Experiences from studies in Finland, Slovenia and the USA

Journal of the Royal Statistical Society. Series A: Statistics in Society

Volumn 170, Issue 3, 2007, Pages 647-670

  Callegaro, Mario ^a   Steeh, Charlotte ^b   Buskirk, Trent D ^c   Vehovar, Vasja ^d   Kuusela, Vesa ^e   Piekarski, Linda ^f  

^a UNIVERSITY OF NEBRASKA LINCOLN   (United States)

^b CENTERS FOR DISEASE CONTROL AND PREVENTION   (United States)

^c SAINT LOUIS UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^d UNIVERSITY OF LJUBLJANA   (Slovenia)

^e Statistics Finland   (Finland)

^f Survey Sampling Inc   (United States)

Author keywords

Mobile phone households; Mobile phone surveys; Non response; Response rates calculation

Indexed keywords

EID: 34250314118     PISSN: 09641998     EISSN: 1467985X     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1467-985X.2006.00461.x     Document Type: Article

References (47)

1. American Association for Public Opinion Research (1998) Standard Definitions: Final Dispositions of Case Codes and Outcome Rates for Surveys. Lenexa : American Association for Public Opinion Research.
2. American Association for Public Opinion Research (2000) Standard Definitions: Final Dispositions of Case Codes and Outcome Rates for Surveys, 2nd edn. Lenexa : American Association for Public Opinion Research.
3. American Association for Public Opinion Research (2005) Standard Definitions: Final Dispositions of Case Codes and Outcome Rates for Surveys, on-line edn 3.1. Lenexa : American Association for Public Opinion Research.
4. American Association for Public Opinion Research (2006) Standard Definitions: Final Dispositions of Case Codes and Outcome Rates for Surveys, 4th edn. Lenexa : American Association for Public Opinion Research.
5. American Statistical Association (1974) Report on the ASA Conference on Surveys of Human Populations. Am. Statistn, 28, 30 34.
6. Autorité de Régulation des Télécommunications (2004) L'observatoire des Mobiles: Données Chiffrées au: 31 Décembre 2003. Paris : Autorité de Régulation des Télécommunications.
7. Beck, F., Legleye, S. Peretti-Watel, P. (2005) Aux abonnes absents: liste rouge et telephone portable dans les enquetes en population générale sur les drogues. Bull. Methodol. Sociol., 86, 5 29.
8. Brick, M. J., Montaquila, J. Scheuren, F. (2002) Estimating residency rates for undetermined telephone numbers. Publ. Opin. Q., 66, 18 39.
9. Buzzi, C., Callegaro, M., Schizzerotto, A. Vezzoni, C. (2000) Studio o Lavoro?: le Scelte Formative ed Occupazionali dei Maturi Trentini. Trento : Rettorato.
10. Callegaro, M. (2002a) Building the frame for mobile phone surveys: telephone sampling designs for cellular phone surveys: a feasibility study in the 402 area code. Manuscript. University of Nebraska, Lincoln. Unpublished.
11. Callegaro, M. (2002b) The cellular phone situation in Italy: coverage, frame, billing systems. 57th A. Conf. American Association for Public Opinion Research, St Pete Beach.
12. Callegaro, M. (2004) Operator messages when calling mobile phones in Italy. Manuscript. University of Nebraska, Lincoln. Unpublished.
13. Callegaro, M., McCutcheon, A. Ludwig, J. (2006) Who's calling?: the impact of caller-ID on telephone survey response. 2nd Int. Conf. Telephone Survey Methodology, Miami.
14. Callegaro, M. Poggio, T. (2006) Where can I call you?: the 'mobile' revolution and its impact on survey research and coverage error: discussing the Italian case. In Recent Developments and Applications in Social Research Methodology: Proc. 6th Int. Conf. Social Science Methodology, Amsterdam, 2004 (eds C. van Dijkum, J. Blasius C. Durand). Leverkusen-Opladen : Budrich.
15. Costabile, M. Addis, M. (2002) Comunicazione mobile in Italia; passato, presente e futuro. In Mobile Communication: Successi di Marketing nelle Telecomunicazioni Mobili in Italia (eds M. Costabile M. Addis pp. 23 76. Milan : Il Sole 24 Ore.
16. Council of American Survey Research Organizations (1982) On the definition of response rates: a special report of the CASRO task force on completion rates. Report. Council of American Survey Research Organizations, Port Jefferson. (Available from http://www.casro.org/resprates.cfm
17. Couper, M. P. Lyberg, L. E. (2005) The use of paradata in survey research. 55th Sessn International Statistical Institute, Sydney.
18. Doxa (2003) Junior 2002: Indagine sui Comportamenti dei Ragazzi 5-13 Anni. Milan : Doxa.
19. Electronic Communications Committee (2005) Implementation of mobile number portability in CEPT countries. Report 31. Electronic Communications Committee, Copenhagen.
20. Ezzati-Rice, T., Frankel, M. R., Hoaglin, D. C., Loft, J. D., Coronado, V. G. Wright, R. A. (2000) An alternative measure of response rate in random-digit-dialing surveys that screen for eligible subpopulations. J. Econ. Socl Measmnt, 26, 99 109.
21. Federal Communication Commission (2004) Ninth report. Report FC-04-216. Federal Communication Commission, Washington DC.
22. Frankel, L. R. (1983) The report of the CASRO task force on response rates. In Improving Data Quality in a Sample Survey: Proc. Marketing Science Institute Wrkshp, Nov. 8th, 1982 (ed. F. Wiseman pp. 1 11. Cambridge : Marketing Science Institute.
23. General Accounting Office (2003) Telecommunications: FCC should include call quality in its annual report on competition in mobile phone services. Report GAO-03-501. General Accounting Office, Washington DC.
24. Groves, R. M. Heeringa, S. G. (2006) Responsive design for household surveys: tools for actively controlling survey errors and costs. J. R. Statist. Soc. A, 169, 439 457.
25. International Telecommunication Union (2004) Mobile cellular, subscribers per 100 people. International Telecommunication Union, Geneva. (Available from http://www.itu.int/ITU-D/ict/statistics/at_glance/cellular04.pdf
26. Ipsos (2004) EU Telecom services indicators. Report. European Commission, Brussels. (Available from http://europa.eu.int/information_society/policy/ ecomm/doc/info_centre/studies_ext_consult/inra_year2004/ report_telecom_2004_final_reduced.pdf
27. Kim, S. W. Lepkowski, J. M. (2002) Telephone household non coverage and mobile telephones. 57th A. Conf. American Association for Public Opinion Research St Pete Beach.
28. Kuusela, V. (1998) Telephone coverage in Finland. Int. BLAISE User Group Newslett., 11. (Available from http://www.blaiseusers.org/newsletters/bug11/ fintel.htm.)
29. Kviz, F. J. (1977) Toward a standard definition of response rate. Publ. Opin. Q., 41, 265 267.
30. Lavrakas, P. J. (2005) Cell phone sampling summit II. Report. Nielsen Media Research, New York. (Available from http://www.nielsenmedia.com/ cellphonesummit/cellphone.html.)
31. Lynn, P., Beerten, R., Laiho, J. Martin, J. (2001) Recommended standard final outcome categories and standard definitions of response rate for social surveys. Working Paper 2001-23. Institute for Social and Economic Research, University of Essex, Colchester.
32. Lynn, P., Beerten, R., Laiho, J. Martin, J. (2002) Towards standardisation of survey outcome categories and response rate calculations. Res. Off. Statist., 5, 61 84.
33. Lynn, P., Nicolaas, G., Beerten, R., Laiho, J. Martin, J. (2006) Harmonised final outcome categories and standard definitions of response rates for UK social surveys: version 2.0. Manuscript. University of Essex, Colchester. Unpublished.
34. McCarty, C. (2003) Differences in response rates using most recent versus final dispositions in telephone surveys. Publ, Opin Q., 67, 396 406.
35. Oftel (2001) Use of Multiple SIM Cards in Mobile Phones, by Consumers in Italy, Finland & Portugal - Summary of Oftel Research, April-May 2001. London : Office of Telecommunications.
36. Oftel (2003a) Consumers' Use of Fixed and Mobile Phone: Q13 May 2003. London : Office of Telecommunications.
37. Oftel (2003b) Consumers' Use of Fixed and Mobile Phone: Q14 August 2003. London : Office of Telecommunications.
38. Platek, R. Gray, G. B. (1986) On the definitions of response rates. Surv. Methodol., 12, 17 27.
39. Regulatory Authority for Telecommunications and Posts (2004) Annual Report 2004. Bonn : Regulatory Authority for Telecommunications and Posts.
40. Robbins, K. A. Turner, M. A. (2002) United States: popular, pragmatic and problematic. In Perpetual Contact: Mobile Communication, Private Talk, Public Performance (eds J. E. Katz M. A. Aakhus pp. 80 93. Cambridge : Cambridge University Press.
41. Roy, G. Vanheuverzwyn, A. (2002) Mobile phone in sample surveys. Int. Conf. Improving Surveys Copenhagen.
42. Shapiro, G., Battaglia, M., Camburn, D., Massey, J. Tompkins, L. (1995) Calling local telephone company business offices to determine the residential status of a wide class of unresolved telephone numbers in a Random-Digit-Dialing sample. Proc. Surv. Res. Meth. Sect. Am. Statist. Ass., 975 980.
43. Smith, T. W. (2003) A review of methods to estimate the status of cases with unknown eligibility. Report. American Association for Public Opinion Research, Lenexa.
44. Steeh, C., Buskirk, T. D. Callegaro, M. (2006) Using text messages in U.S. cell phone surveys. Fld Meth., to be published.
45. Tucker, C., Brick, M. Meekins, B. J. (2005a) Final results from the 2004 CPS Supplement on telephone usage. 60th A. Conf. American Association for Public Opinion Research Miami.
46. Tucker, C., Brick, M. J., Meekins, B. J. Morgenstein, D. (2005b) Household telephone service and usage patterns in the US in 2004. Proc. Surv. Res. Meth. Sect. Am. Statist. Ass., 4528 4534.
47. Vehovar, V., Belak, E., Batagelj, Z. Cikic, S. (2004) Mobile phone surveys: the Slovenian case study. Metodol. Zvez., 1, 1 19.