Self-selection: Are we beating a dead horse?

Keating, Kenneth M.

doi:10.1016/0149-7189(89)90004-9

Cited by 9 publications

(8 citation statements)

References 5 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…A straightforward strategy to test for self-selection involves comparisons between participants and nonparticipants. (Keating, 1989). A replication of the present study, for example, might involve a follow-up telephone survey of the targeted mail survey respondents, including both participants and nonparticipants by mail.…”

Section: Directions Forfurther Studymentioning

confidence: 94%

“…In other words, the same factors that influence willingness to participate may influence the results of the study (Kaplan, 1989;Keating, 1989). Self-selection is a particularly difficult problem in the study of social attitudes in voluntary samples from the general population, since participation in these circumstances is totally dependent on citizen cooperation and interest (Campbell and Stanley, 1963, p. 19).…”

Section: Self-selection Biasmentioning

confidence: 98%

“…Self-selection is a particularly difficult problem in the study of social attitudes in voluntary samples from the general population, since participation in these circumstances is totally dependent on citizen cooperation and interest (Campbell and Stanley, 1963, p. 19). Comparisons across studies are confounded when either of the comparison groups selfselects in a way that affects their responses (Berry, 1983;Campbell and Stanley, 1963;Keating, 1989).…”

Section: Self-selection Biasmentioning

confidence: 98%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Mail vs. telephone surveys of criminal justice attitudes: A comparative analysis

1996

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study compares results from surveys using two modes of administration. A subset of questions from the 1992 Texas Crime Poll, a statewide poll conducted annually by mail, was replicated in telephone interviews using the Computer Assisted Telephone Interviewing System. The phone survey yielded better participation rates but less complete responses to individual attitude questions than did the mail poll. As expected, the mail survey was less expensive but less efficient than the automated phone survey. The central finding was that all but one of the responses to five attitude questions differed significantly across the surveys. The samples differed in their demographic composition, but this did not explain differences in the substantive findings from the mail and phone surveys. The discussion considers alternative explanations for differences in the findings from the two surveys and suggests directions for further comparative research.

show abstract

Section: Directions Forfurther Studymentioning

confidence: 94%

Section: Self-selection Biasmentioning

confidence: 98%

Section: Self-selection Biasmentioning

confidence: 98%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Mail vs. telephone surveys of criminal justice attitudes: A comparative analysis

1996

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…' Keating (1989) offers approaches for mitigating potential self-selection bias. Methods for estimating energy savings associated with free riders are presented in Weinstein, Scott, and Jones (1989).…”

Section: Notesmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Design of Residential Energy Conservation Programs Under Least‐Cost Planning

Walsh

Aleong

1992

Policy Studies Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Act to state governments. With more discretion and enhanced flexibility in overall program administration, states have begun to involve gas and electric utilities directly in program design.An outcome of the new role of the states has been the adoption or development of mandated least-cost (LC) approaches to utility planning in over half of the state utility regulatory commissions in the United States (Berry, 1988).' The strategy of LC planning is to select the mix of supply-side and demand-side measures that will assure reliable energy at the least possible cosL Supply-side measures increase the available supply of energy; demand-side measures constrain the demand for the available supply. RCS and other demand-side residential energy conservation programs have been regarded by policymakers, conservation advocates, and some utilities as LC options to the altemative of traditional supply sources, including new power plant construction-apCTspective that has broader implicationsfor achieving environmental policy goals and controlling rates for consumers.The emergence of LC planning represents an interesting tum of events in the nature of energy policy design, as related to the role of the political process. During the Reagan years, devolution of the RCS was instituted in response to utility companies' opposition to the RCS mandate. The industry's position was that the RCS represented federal interference in an area traditionally regulated at the state level (Walsh, 1989). Under LC planning, however, utilities come under closer scrutiny than had been conducted under federal oversight of the RCS, with conservation programs now becoming an integral part of regulatory proceedings. Thus, although Dryzek and Ripley (1988, p. 706) observe that political divisions may produce barriers to "ambitious policy design," the Reagan administration's response to special interests in this instance may have served, ironically, to strengthen rather than weaken the usefulness of evaluation in the design of energy policy.The factors enhancing evaluation's role are both structural and functional. The structural aspect is that design takes place at the state level, rather than the national level. Thus programs can be calibrated to meetrelatively specific local conditions. The functional element lies in the differentiation, or diversity, of programmatic options that

show abstract

“…This critique of energy research is not new (see Keating, 1989). However, it may not be the selection of the interviewees which is the problem.…”

Section: Demographicsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Energy-efficiency interventions in housing: learning from the inhabitants

Crosbie

Baker²

2010

Building Research & Information

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Technological solutions to domestic energy reduction are insufficient without the cooperation of householders. It does not matter how much energy hypothetically could be saved by efficient technologies, if no one wants to live in the properties, install or use efficient lighting and heating. Therefore, to improve the uptake and effectiveness of household energy efficiency interventions, it is necessary to understand 'why people react to particular energy efficiency interventions in the ways that they do?' An analysis is presented of in-depth interviews with 50 householders that participated in one of four domestic energy efficiency interventions. The findings indicate that issues such as aesthetic tastes and effects on lifestyle are central to why people reject economically viable simple and well understood domestic energy efficiency interventions.

show abstract

Self-selection: Are we beating a dead horse?

Cited by 9 publications

References 5 publications

Mail vs. telephone surveys of criminal justice attitudes: A comparative analysis

Mail vs. telephone surveys of criminal justice attitudes: A comparative analysis

The Design of Residential Energy Conservation Programs Under Least‐Cost Planning

Energy-efficiency interventions in housing: learning from the inhabitants

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About