Researchers who are interested in small towns and rural communities in the United States often find that they need to conduct their own sample surveys because many large national surveys, such as the American Community Survey, do not collect enough representative responses to make precise estimates. In collecting their own survey data, researchers face a number of challenges, such as sampling and coverage limitations. This article summarizes those challenges and tests mail and Internet methodologies for collecting data in small towns and rural communities using the U.S. Postal Service’s Delivery Sequence File as a sample frame. Findings indicate that the Delivery Sequence File can be used to sample households in rural locations by sending them invitations via postal mail to respond to either paper-and-pencil or Internet surveys. Although the mail methodology is quite successful, the results for the Internet suggest that Web surveys alone exclude potentially important segments of the population of small towns and rural communities. However, Web surveys supplemented with postal questionnaires produce results quite similar to those of mail-only surveys, representing a possible cost savings for researchers who have access to Web survey capabilities.
Blumberg, S.J., & Luke, J.V. ( 2009). Wireless substitution: Early release of estimates from the National Health Interview Survey, July-December 2008. Atlanta, GA: National Center for Health Statistics .
2.
Blumberg, S.J., & Luke, J.V. ( 2007). Coverage bias in traditional telephone surveys of low-income and young adults. Public Opinion Quarterly, 71, 734-749.
3.
Blumberg, S.J., Luke, J.V., Davern, M.E., Yu, T., & Soderberg, K. ( 2009). Wireless substitution: State-level estimates from the National Health Interview Survey, January-December 2007 (National Health Statistics Report No. 14). Hyattsville, MD: National Center for Health Statistics.
4.
Christian, L.M., & Dimock, M. ( 2009, May). Where do we find you? How to locate cell respondents . Paper presented at the American Association for Public Opinion Research, Hollywood, FL.
5.
Copeland, K. ( 2008, August). Helping data users better understand the American Community Survey. Paper presented at the Joint Statistical Meetings, Denver, CO.
6.
Council of American Survey Research Organizations. ( 2007). CASRO code of standards and ethics for survey research . Retrieved March 17, 2008, from http://casro.org/pdfs/CodeVertical-FINAL.pdf
7.
Couper, M.P., & Nicholls, W.L. , II. (1998). The history and development of computer assisted survey information collection methods. In M. Couper, R. P. Baker , J. Bethlehem, C. Z. F. Clark, J. Martin, W. L. Nicholls II, & J. M. O’Reilly (Eds.), Computer assisted survey information collection (pp. 1-21). New York: Wiley .
8.
de Leeuw, E.D., Dillman, D.A., & Hox, J.J. ( 2008). Mixed mode surveys: When and why. In E. D. de Leeuw, J. J. Hox, & D. A. Dillman (Eds.), International handbook of survey methodology (pp. 299-316). New York: Erlbaum.
9.
Dillman, D.A. ( 1978). Mail and telephone surveys: The total design method. New York: Wiley Interscience.
10.
Dillman, D.A. ( 1991). The design and administration of mail surveys. Annual Review of Sociology, 17, 225-249.
11.
Dillman, D.A., Smyth, J.D., & Christian, L.M. (2009). Internet, mail and mixed-mode surveys: The tailored design method (3rd ed.). New York: Wiley.
12.
Groves, R.M. ( 1989). Survey errors and survey costs. New York: Wiley.
13.
Horrigan, J.B. ( 2008). Home broadband adoption 2008: Adoption stalls for low-income Americans even as many broadband users opt for premium services that give them more speed. Retrieved December 10, 2008, from http://www.pewInternet.org/pdfs/PIP_Broadband_2008.pdf
14.
Iannacchione, V.G., Staab, J.M., & Redden, D.T. ( 2003). Evaluating the use of residential mailing addresses in a metropolitan household survey. Public Opinion Quarterly , 67, 202-210.
15.
Johnson, D. E., Meiller, L., Miller, L., & Summers, G. F. (Eds.). (1987). Needs assessment: Theory and methods. Ames: Iowa State University Press.
16.
Keeter, S., Dimock, M., & Christian, L. ( 2008). Calling cell phones in the ’08 pre-election polls . Washington, DC: Pew Research Center for the People & the Press. Retrieved December 18, 2008, from http://people-press.org/reports/pdf/cell-phone-commentary.pdf
17.
Keeter, S., Kennedy, C., Clark, A., Tompson, T., & Mokrzycki, M. ( 2007). What’s missing from national landline RDD surveys? The impact of the growing cell-only population. Public Opinion Quarterly, 71, 772-792.
18.
Lavrakas, P.J. ( 2008). Surveys by telephone. In W. Donsbach & M. W. Traugott (Eds.), The Sage handbook of public opinion research (pp. 249-261) Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
19.
Lavrakas, P.J., Steeh, C., Bumberg, S., Boyle, J., Brick, M., Callegaro, M., et al. (2008). AAPOR cell phone task force guidelines and considerations for survey researchers when planning and conducting RDD and other telephone surveys in the U.S. with respondents reached via cell phone numbers. American Association of Public Opinion Research .
20.
Link, M.W., Battaglia, M.P., Frankel, M., Osborn, L., & Mokdad, A. ( 2008). Comparison of address-based sampling (ABS) versus random-digit dialing (RDD) for general population surveys. Public Opinion Quarterly, 72, 6-27.
21.
Link, M.W., Battaglia, M.P., Giambo, P., Frankel, M.R., Mokdad, A.H., & Rao, R.S. ( 2005, May). Assessment of address frame replacements for RDD sampling frames. Paper presented at the annual conference of the American Association for Public Opinion Research, Miami Beach, FL.
22.
Madden, M. ( 2006). Internet penetration and impact data memo. Washington, DC: Pew Internet & American Life Project . Retrieved December 10, 2008, from http://www.pewInternet.org/pdfs/PIP_Internet_Impact.pdf
23.
Millar, M.M., O’Neill, A.C., & Dillman, D.A. ( 2009). Are mode preferences real? (Technical Report No. 09-003) . Pullman: Washington State University, Social and Economic Sciences Research Center.
24.
National Telecommunications and Information Administration. (2008). Networked nation: Broadband in America 2007. Washington, DC: Department of Commerce. Retrieved December 10, 2008, from http://www.ntia.doc.gov/reports/2008/NetworkedNationBroadbandinAmerica2007.pdf
25.
O’Muircheartaigh, C., English, E.M., & Eckman, S. ( 2007, May). Predicting the relative quality of alternative sampling frames. Paper presented at the annual conference of the American Association for Public Opinion Research, Anaheim, CA.
26.
Pew Center for the People & the Press. ( 1995). Technology in the American household: Americans going online . . . explosive growth, uncertain destinations. Retrieved December 10, 2008, from http://people-press.org/reports/pdf/136.pdf
27.
Pew Internet & American Life Project. ( 2008). Demographics of Internet users: August 12-31, 2008 Tracking Survey. Retrieved December 10, 2008, from http://www.pewInternet.org/trends/User_Demo_10%2020%2008.htm
28.
Princeton Survey Research Associates International. ( 2008). Spring tracking survey 2008 final topline for the Pew Internet & American Life Project. Retrieved December 9, 2008, from http://www.pewInternet.org/pdfs/PIP_Broadband.2008.Topline.pdf
29.
Rookey, B.D., Hanway, S., & Dillman, D.A. ( 2008). Does a probability-based household panel benefit from assignment to postal response as an alternative to Internet-only? Public Opinion Quarterly, 72, 962-984.
30.
Steve, K., Dally, G., Lavrakas, P.J., Yancey, T., & Kulp, D. ( 2007, May). R&D studies to replace the RDD-frame with an ABS-frame. Paper presented at the annual conference of the American Association for Public Opinion Research, Anaheim, CA.
31.
Tucker, C., & Lepkowski, J.M. (2008). Telephone survey methods: Adapting to change. In J. M. Lepkowski, C. Tucker, J. M. Brick , E. D. de Leeuw, L. Japec, P. J. Lavrakas , et al. (Eds.), Advances in telephone survey methodology (pp. 1-26). New York: Wiley.
32.
U.S. Census Bureau. (2009). Design and methodology: American Community Survey. Washington DC: Author.
33.
Zhang, C., Callegaro, M., & Thomas, M. ( 2008, November). More than the digital divide? Investigating the differences between Internet and non Internet users on attitudes and behaviors . Paper presented at the Midwest Association for Public Opinion Research conference, Chicago.
