Survey Data Harmonization and the Quality of Data Documentation in Cross‐national Surveys

Kołczyńska, Marta; Schoene, Matthew

doi:10.1002/9781118884997.ch44

Cited by 14 publications

(13 citation statements)

References 12 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…On the contrary, EB and CCEB -not shown in the graph due to lack of changes over time -clearly stand out as not only exhibiting no improvement and consistently withholding information on outcome rates but also as not providing documentation on the level of national surveys. Similar patterns -both in terms of cross-project differences and within-project changes -were found in Kołczyńska and Schoene (2018).…”

Section: Differences In the Overall Documentation Quality In Cross-cosupporting

confidence: 68%

“…It is also worth noting that our analysis only includes surveys from Europe, which tend to be of high quality relative to cross-national survey projects carried out in other regions of the world (cf. Kołczyńska & Schoene, 2018).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Whether the survey documentation contains all the essential information about the key stages of the survey process has a direct bearing on survey usability, which is an importantif underappreciated -dimension of survey quality (Biemer, 2010). Our evaluation draws from an earlier study of survey documentation quality that included fewer and more general indicators, also covering questionnaire development (Kołczyńska & Schoene, 2018).…”

Section: Quality Assessment Of Methodological Documentationmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Sampling and fieldwork practices in Europe: Analysis of methodological documentation from 1,537 surveys in five cross-national projects, 1981-2017

Jabkowski

Kołczyńska

2020

Methodology

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article addresses the comparability of sampling and fieldwork with an analysis of methodological data describing 1,537 national surveys from five major comparative cross-national survey projects in Europe carried out in the period from 1981 to 2017. We describe the variation in the quality of the survey documentation, and in the survey methodologies themselves, focusing on survey procedures with respect to: 1) sampling frames, 2) types of survey samples and sampling designs, 3) within-household selection of target persons in address-based samples, 4) fieldwork execution and 5) fieldwork outcome rates. Our results show substantial differences in sample designs and fieldwork procedures across survey projects, as well as changes within projects over time. This variation invites caution when selecting data for analysis. We conclude with recommendations regarding the use of information about the survey process to select existing survey data for comparative analyses.

show abstract

Section: Differences In the Overall Documentation Quality In Cross-cosupporting

confidence: 68%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Quality Assessment Of Methodological Documentationmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Sampling and fieldwork practices in Europe: Analysis of methodological documentation from 1,537 surveys in five cross-national projects, 1981-2017

Jabkowski

Kołczyńska

2020

Methodology

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…We follow the SDR analytic framework (for an outline, see Slomczynski & Tomescu-Dubrow, 2018) and account for methodological differences present in the original formulation of the trust questions (e.g. Slomczynski et al, 2016; also, Kołczyńska & Slomczynski, 2018) and for differentiation in survey data quality (for operational definition of survey quality in SDR, see Kołczyńska & Schoene, 2018; Slomczynski & Tomescu-Dubrow, 2018; Oleksiyenko et al, 2018) to calculate the best estimate of mean values of trust in each of the political institutions (see the online Supplement A for specifics; also, Kwak & Slomczynski, 2019).…”

Section: Data and Variablesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Youth, Institutional Trust, and Democratic Backsliding

Kwak

Tomescu-Dubrow

Slomczynski

et al. 2020

American Behavioral Scientist

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In recent decades, many countries ranging from quasidemocratic regimes to well-established democracies have faced democratic backsliding. In this study, we draw on Foa and Mounk and other related literature to examine the effects of regime delegitimation on democratic backsliding, focusing on youth’s trust in political institutions—parliament, legal systems, and political parties—relative to trust of the older population. We use an unbalanced panel data set that combines a country-year indicator of liberal democracy from the Varieties of Democracy project with aggregate survey-based measures of absolute and relative institutional trust from the Survey Data Recycling database; the data set covers 46 countries from 2009 to 2017. We find that the ratio of youth’s institutional trust to that of older persons has a substantive effect on the quality of liberal democracy in the future, and that the effect is amplified by the relative size of the youth population.

show abstract

“…As the interdisciplinary field of survey data harmonization grows (e.g., Dubrow & Tomescu-Dubrow, 2016), so do efforts to strengthen and integrate the methodology of ex-post harmonization (e.g., Granda & Blasczyk, 2016; Kołczyńska & Schoene, 2018; Oleksiyenko et al, 2018; Slomczynski et al, 2016; Slomczynski & Tomescu-Dubrow, 2018; Wolf et al, 2016). An important area of development deals with methodological variability among international survey projects that differences in the properties of source variables measuring the same concept, introduce.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Survey Data Quality in Analyzing Harmonized Indicators of Protest Behavior: A Survey Data Recycling Approach

Slomczynski

Tomescu-Dubrow

Wysmulek

2021

American Behavioral Scientist

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article proposes a new approach to analyze protest participation measured in surveys of uneven quality. Because single international survey projects cover only a fraction of the world’s nations in specific periods, researchers increasingly turn to ex-post harmonization of different survey data sets not a priori designed as comparable. However, very few scholars systematically examine the impact of the survey data quality on substantive results. We argue that the variation in source data, especially deviations from standards of survey documentation, data processing, and computer files—proposed by methodologists of Total Survey Error, Survey Quality Monitoring, and Fitness for Intended Use—is important for analyzing protest behavior. In particular, we apply the Survey Data Recycling framework to investigate the extent to which indicators of attending demonstrations and signing petitions in 1,184 national survey projects are associated with measures of data quality, controlling for variability in the questionnaire items. We demonstrate that the null hypothesis of no impact of measures of survey quality on indicators of protest participation must be rejected. Measures of survey documentation, data processing, and computer records, taken together, explain over 5% of the intersurvey variance in the proportions of the populations attending demonstrations or signing petitions.

show abstract

Survey Data Harmonization and the Quality of Data Documentation in Cross‐national Surveys

Cited by 14 publications

References 12 publications

Sampling and fieldwork practices in Europe: Analysis of methodological documentation from 1,537 surveys in five cross-national projects, 1981-2017

Sampling and fieldwork practices in Europe: Analysis of methodological documentation from 1,537 surveys in five cross-national projects, 1981-2017

Youth, Institutional Trust, and Democratic Backsliding

Survey Data Quality in Analyzing Harmonized Indicators of Protest Behavior: A Survey Data Recycling Approach

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About