Abstract
The computerisation of membership lists offers considerable scope for postal surveys of trade unionists. However, faith in the new technology can give rise to the illusion of increased accuracy. Yet, the computerised data bases, while undoubtedly quicker and easier to use, may be no more accurate than their manual predecessors and samples drawn from them can result in misleading response rates. Therefore, with reference to a specific case study of a major trade union, we argue that researchers should seek to establish empirically the probable error in their lists with a view to constructing realistic ‘benchmarks’. Then, these substantial new resources can provide a solid basis for worthwhile research.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.