Improving the Utility of the DSF Address-based Frame through Ancillary Information

Field Methods

Volumn 26, Issue 1, 2014, Pages 70-86

  Amaya, Ashley ^a   LeClere, Felicia ^b   Fiorio, Lee ^b   English, Ned ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF MARYLAND   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF CHICAGO   (United States)

Author keywords

address based sampling; DSF; frame construction

Indexed keywords

EID: 84891882031     PISSN: 1525822X     EISSN: 15523969     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/1525822X13516839     Document Type: Article

References (16)

1. Amaya A.,Euler A.Assuming "e." Presented at the 5th Annual Joint Statistical Meetings. 2010;:.
2. Archer W.,Ling D.,Smith B. C.Ownership duration in the residential housing market: The influence of structure, tenure, household and neighborhood factors.Journal of Real Estate Finance & Economics. 2010;40:41-61.
3. Chmura L.,Yancey T.Enhancing address based sampling with contingent incentives and sample indicators. 2011;:.
4. Dekker K.,English N.An evaluation of delivery sequence file sufficiency in rural and suburban segments: When is lisitng required. 2010;:.
5. Gabriel S. A.,Nothaft F. E.Rental housing markets, the incidence and duration of vacancy, and the natural vacancy rate.Journal of Urban Economics. 2001;49:11-149.
6. Iannacchione V. G.,Staab J. M.,Redden D. T.Evaluating the use of residential mailing addresses in a metropolitan household survey.Public Opinion Quarterly. 2003;67:202-10.
7. Link M. W.,Battaglia M. P.,Frankel M. R.,Osborn L.,Mokdad A. H.A comparison of address-based sampling (ABS) versus random-digit dialing (RDD) for general population surveys.Public Opinion Quarterly. 2008;72:6-27.
8. McMichael J. P.,Shook-Sa B. E.,McKamey A. C.,Stolzenberg S. J.,Morton K. B.,Iannacchione V. G.An evaluation of a training protocol designed to supplement the coverage of an address-based sampling frame. 2011;:.
9. MontaquilaJ. M.BrickJ. M.HagedornM. C.WilliamsD. 2010. Maximizing response in a two-phase survey with mail as the primary mode. http://edicsweb.ed.gov/edics_files_web/04351/Att_Appendix%20A%20NHES%202011-2012%20Field%20Test%201%20AAPOR2010.pdf(accessed September 1, 2011).
10. Montaquila J.,Hsu V.,Brick J. M.,English N.,O'Muircheartaigh C.A comparative evaluation of traditional listing vs. address-based sampling frames: Matching with field investigation of discrepancies. 2000;:.
11. O'Muircheartaigh C.,Eckman S.,English N.,Lepkowski J.,Heeringa S.Comparison of traditional listing and the USPS address database as frames for national area probability samples. 2005;:12-15.
12. O'Muircheartaigh C.,English N.,Eckman S.,Upchurch H.,Garcia E.,Lepkowski J.Validating a sampling revolution: Benchmarking address lists against traditional listing. 2006;:4189-96.
13. O'Muircheartaigh C.,English N.,Latterner M.,Eckman S.,Dekker K.Modeling the need to traditional vs. commercially-available address listings for in-person surveys: Results from a national validation of addresses. 2009;:6193-202.
14. U.S. Census Bureau. 2010a. 2010 Annual housing vacancies and homeownership statistics (CPS/HVS). http://www.census.gov/hhes/www/housing/hvs/annual10/ann10ind.html(accessed May 4, 2011).
15. U.S. Census Bureau. 2010b. Housing vacancies and homeownership (CPS/HVS). http://www.census.gov/hhes/www/housing/hvs/qtr410/q410def.html(accessed August 18, 2011).
16. WilliamsD.MontaquilaJ. M.BrickJ. M.HagedornM. C. 2010. Screening for specific population groups in mail surveys. http://edicsweb.ed.gov/edics_files_web/04351/Att_Appendix%20A%20NHES%202011-2012%20Field%20Test%202%20AAPOR2010.pdf(accessed September 1, 2011).