Cell Phone Survey Feasibility in The U.S.: Sampling and Calling Cell Numbers Versus Landline Numbers

Brick, J. Michael; Brick, Pat D.; Dipko, Sarah; Presser, Stanley; Tucker, Clyde; Yuan, Yangyang

doi:10.1093/poq/nfl040

Cited by 118 publications

(82 citation statements)

References 3 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Brick et al (2007) find that sample members are more likely to be away from their home when contacted by mobile phone, and Lavrakas et al (2010) report that across a number of studies around one-third of respondents called on a mobile number are interviewed away from home. Schneiderat and Häder (2007) suggest that mobile phone respondents may be more likely to be in the presence of other people.…”

Section: Measurement Differences Between Mobile and Fixed Phonesmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Impact of Mobile Phones on Survey Measurement Error

Lynn

Kaminska

2012

Public Opinion Quarterly

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Standard-Nutzungsbedingungen:Die Dokumente auf EconStor dürfen zu eigenen wissenschaftlichen Zwecken und zum Privatgebrauch gespeichert und kopiert werden.Sie dürfen die Dokumente nicht für öffentliche oder kommerzielle Zwecke vervielfältigen, öffentlich ausstellen, öffentlich zugänglich machen, vertreiben oder anderweitig nutzen.Sofern die Verfasser die Dokumente unter Open-Content-Lizenzen (insbesondere CC-Lizenzen) zur Verfügung gestellt haben sollten, gelten abweichend von diesen Nutzungsbedingungen die in der dort genannten Lizenz gewährten Nutzungsrechte. Terms of use: Documents in Non-Technical SummarySurvey interviews are increasingly carried out on mobile phones. There are a number of reasons to think that the experience of being interviewed on a mobile phone may differ from that of being interviewed on a fixed line phone. We are interested in whether those differences in the experience make a difference to the data that are collectedIn this paper, we present a theory of the ways in which mobile phone interviews and fixed phone interviews may differ and how these differences may affect survey measurement. We identify four key features that may vary between mobile and fixed phone interviews. These are line quality, the extent of multi-tasking amongst survey respondents, the extent to which survey respondents are distracted from the task of answering questions, and the extent to which other people are present and able to overhear what the survey respondent is saying.We then evaluate the extent to which differences in these features affect survey measures by analysing data from a randomised experiment. In the experiment, a sample of people who had both mobile and fixed phones were randomly assigned to be interviewed either on their mobile phone or on their fixed phone.Overall, we find only few and small differences in survey measures between the mobile phone interviews and the fixed phone interviews. The few differences that we find suggest that data quality may be higher with mobile phone interviews.This may be because survey respondents have greater control over whether other people are within earshot and whether others can listen in from another line. When other people can hear the responses being given -which may be more likely when responding on a fixed line -respondents may have a tendency to censor their responses to avoid socially undesirable answers. The Impact of Mobile Phones on Survey Measurement Error Peter Lynn Institute for Social and Economic Research, University of Essex Olena Kaminska Institute for Social and Economic Research, University of EssexAbstract: Mobile phone survey interviewing is becoming increasingly prevalent, so it is important to understand how it affects measurement error. We link cognitive response process theory (Tourangeau et al 2000) to theories of mode effects to build a comprehensive framework that identifies ways in which the different context of mobile interviews and differences inherent in the technology can influence survey responses. We evaluate elements of th...

show abstract

Section: Measurement Differences Between Mobile and Fixed Phonesmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Impact of Mobile Phones on Survey Measurement Error

Lynn

Kaminska

2012

Public Opinion Quarterly

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Past research presents inconsistent results on this matter. Kuusela and Notkola (1999) argue that mobile and fixed phone surveys do not differ in terms of length of interviews, while Nathan (2001) and Brick et al (2007) state that mobile phone interviews tend to be longer than fixed phone surveys because the conditions of the respondent's environment may distract his/her concentration and thus delay the respondent's coming-up-with-an-answer. Table 6 shows some statistics regarding the completion time of the interviews.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Using Mobile Phones for Survey Research: A Comparison with Fixed Phones

2009

International Journal of Market Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Areas of selection bias were identified by comparing age, race-ethnicity, and educational attainment demographics of survey respondents to the underlying Census 2000 demographics. The population under 45 years of age was underrepresented by 10%, likely due to the relative unavailability of this age group because of work and other time demands, bias in the direct marketing data toward the financially established population, and their greater exclusive use of cellular telephones (Brick et al, 2007). This population group is less susceptible to symptomatic coccidioidomycosis and its underrepresentation would result in larger disease frequency estimates for the general population.…”

Section: Adaptability Of Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Landscape-epidemiological study design to investigate an environmentally based disease

Tabor

O'Rourke

Lebowitz

et al. 2010

J Expo Sci Environ Epidemiol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Cost-effective approaches for identifying and enrolling subjects in community-based epidemiological studies face many challenges. Additional challenges arise when a neighborhood scale of analysis is required to distinguish between individual-and group-level risk factors with strong environmental determinants. A stratified, two-stage, cross-sectional, address-based telephone survey of Greater Tucson, Arizona, was conducted in [2002][2003]. Subjects were recruited from direct marketing data at neighborhood resolution using a geographic information system (GIS). Three geomorphic strata were divided into two demographic units. Households were randomly selected within census block groups, selected using the probability proportional to size technique. Purchased direct marketing lists represented 45.2% of Census 2000 households in the surveyed block groups. Survey design effect (1.6) on coccidioidomycosis prevalence (88 per 100,000 per year) was substantially reduced in four of the six strata (0.3-0.9). Race-ethnicity was more robust than age and gender to compensate for significant selection bias using poststratification. Clustered, address-based telephone surveys provide a costeffective, valid method for recruiting populations from address-based lists using a GIS to design surveys and population survey statistical methods for analysis. Landscape ecology provides effective methods for identifying scales of analysis and units for stratification that will improve sampling efficiency when environmental variables of interest are strong predictors.

show abstract

Cell Phone Survey Feasibility in The U.S.: Sampling and Calling Cell Numbers Versus Landline Numbers

Cited by 118 publications

References 3 publications

The Impact of Mobile Phones on Survey Measurement Error

The Impact of Mobile Phones on Survey Measurement Error

Using Mobile Phones for Survey Research: A Comparison with Fixed Phones

Landscape-epidemiological study design to investigate an environmentally based disease

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About