Quality in unimode and mixed-mode designs: A multitrait-multimethod approach

Survey Research Methods

Volumn 4, Issue 3, 2010, Pages 151-164

  Revilla, Melanie ^a  

^a UNIVERSITAT POMPEU FABRA   (Spain)

Author keywords

Concurrent or sequential designs; Modes of data collection; Selection bias

Indexed keywords

EID: 84864602561     PISSN: None     EISSN: 18643361     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Article

References (31)

1. Alwin, D. F. (1974). Approaches to the interpretation of relationships in the multitrait-multimethod matrix. In H. L. Costner (Ed.), Sociological methodology 1973-74. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
2. Andrews, F. (1984). Construct validity and error components of survey measures: A structural modeling approach. Public Opinion Quarterly, 46, 409-442.
3. Brambilla, D. J., & McKinlay, S. M. (1987). A Comparison of Responses to Mailed Questionnaires and Telephone Interviews in a Mixed-mode Health Survey. American Journal of Epidemiology, 126, 962-971.
4. Campbell, D. T., & Fiske, D. W. (1959). Convergent and Discriminant Validation by the Multitrait-Multimethod Matrix. Psychological Bulletin, 6, 81-105.
5. Couper, M. P., & Miller, P. V. (2009). Introduction to the special issue. Public Opinion Quarterly, 72(5), 831-835.
6. De Heer, W., de Leeuw, E. D., & van der Zouwen, J. (1999). Methodological Issues in Survey Research: a Historical Review. BMS: Bulletin of Sociological Methodology/Bulletin de Méthodologie Sociologique, 64, 25-48.
7. De Leeuw, E. D. (2005). To Mix or Not to Mix Data Collection Modes in Surveys. Journal of Official Statistics, 21(2), 233-255.
8. Dillman, D. A., Clark, J. R., & West, K. K. (1995). Influence of an Invitation to Answer by Telephone on Response to Census Questionnaires. Public Opinion Quarterly, 51, 201-219.
9. Dillman, D. A., Phelps, G., Tortora, R., Swift, K., Kohrell, J., Berck, J., et al. (2009). Response Rate and Measurement Differences in Mixed Mode Surveys Using Mail, Telephone, interactive Voice Response and the Internet. Social Science Research, 38(1), 1-18.
10. Dillman, D. A., Smyth, J. D., & Christian, L. M. (2008). Internet, Mail, and Mixed-Mode Surveys: The Tailored Design Method (3rd ed.). New York: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
11. Heerwegh, D., & Loosveldt, G. (2009). Face-to-Face Versus Web Surveying in a High-Internet-Coverage Population. Differences in Response Quality. Public Opinion Quarterly, 72(5), 836-846.
12. Jöreskog, K. G. (1970). A general method for the analysis of covariance structures. Biometrika, 57, 239-251.
13. Kalfs, N. (1993). Hour by hour: effects of the data collection mode in time use research. Amsterdam: NIMMO.
14. Kreuter, F., Presser, S., & Tourangeau, R. (2009). Social Desirability Bias in CATI, IVR and Web Surveys: The Effects of Mode and Question Sensitivity. Public Opinion Quarterly, 72(5), 847-865.
15. Krosnick, J. A. (1991). Response Strategies for Coping with the chology, 50, 537-567.
16. Krosnick, J. A., & Alwin, D. F. (1987). An evaluation of a cognitive theory of response-order effects in survey measurement. Public Opinion Quarterly, 51, 201-219.
17. Lynn, P., Häder, S., Gabler, S., & Laaksonen, S. (2007). Methods for Achieving Equivalence of Samples in Cross-National Surveys: The European Social Survey Experience. Journal of Official Statistics, 23(1), 107-140.
18. Lynn, P., Laurie, H., Jäckle, A., & Sala, E. (2006). Sampling and Data Collection Strategies for the Proposed UK Longitudinal Household Survey. Report to ESRC.
19. Lynn, P., Revilla, M., & Vannieuwenhuyze, J. (forthcoming). A comparison of five practical mixed mode and unimode strategies in terms of costs, response rates and sample composition.
20. Revilla, M., & Saris, W. E. (2010). A comparison of surveys using different modes of data collection: ESS versus Liss panel. RECSM working paper 13.
21. Rhodes, S. D., Bowie, D. A., & Hergenrather, K. C. (2003). Collecting Behavioural Data using the World Wide Web: Considerations for Researchers. Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health, 57(1), 68.
22. Roberts, C. (2007). Mixing modes of data collection in surveys: a methodological review. ESRC National Centre for Research Methods. NCRM Methods Review Paper. NCRM/008.
23. Roberts, C. (2008). Designing equivalent questionnaires for a mixed-mode European social survey: report on the findings of the ESS mode experiments. European Social Survey JRA1task3.
24. Saris, W. E., & Andrews, F. M. (1991). Evaluation of measurement instruments using a structural modeling approach. In P. P. Biemer, R. M. Groves, L. E. Lyberg, N. A. Mathiowetz, & S. Sudman (Eds.), Measurement Errors in Surveys (p. 575-597). New York: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
25. Saris, W. E., & Gallhofer, I. (2007). Design, evaluation, and analysis of questionnaires for survey research. New York: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
26. Saris, W. E., Satorra, A., & Van der Veld, W. M. (2009). Testing Structural Equation Models or Detection of Misspecifications? Structural equation modeling: A multidisciplinary Journal, 16(4), 561-582.
27. Shettle, C., & Mooney, G. (1999). Monetary incentives in us government surveys. Journal of Official Statistics, 15(2), 231-250.
28. Tourangeau, R., Rips, L. J., & Rasinski, K. (2000). The Psychology of Survey Response. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
29. Van der Veld, W. M., Saris, W. E., & Satorra, A. (2009). Judgement Rule Aid software.
30. Voogt, R. J. J., & Saris, W. E. (2005). Mixed Mode Designs: Finding the Balance between Nonresponse Bias and Mode Effects. Journal of Official Statistics, 21, 367-387.
31. Werts, C. E., & Linn, R. L. (1970). Path analysis: Psychological examples. Psychological Bulletin, 74, 194-212.