Effets synchrones et longitudinaux sur la qualité des panels CATI des interviewers et des répondants : C'est en particulier dans les enquête par panel que les effets de la perte de répondants, de l'apprentissage par les répondants, et de l'expérience des interviewers jouent un rôle crucial en ce qui concerne la qualité des données. Nous examinons de manière synchrone et longitudinale pour la même enquête trois indicateurs de qualité. Dans l'analyse synchrone, nous comparons la qualité des données dans l'échantillon d'origine non-renouvellé avec celle d'un échantillon qui l'a été, les deux étant sondé dans la même vague. Pour la même vague, une enquête des interviewers a été faite, fournissant des données sur leur démographie sociale, leurs attitudes envers des enquêtes, et leur estimation de la charge de travail, nous permettant ainsi d'estimer l'effet des interviewers. L'analyse longitudinale permet l'analyse des effets de l'apprentissage par les répondants par rapport aux indicateurs de qualité en considérant les mêmes répondants dans plusieurs vagues. Le Panel Suisse des Ménages - une enquête CATI représentative de la population résidentielle suisse - fournit une base de données idéale pour modéliser puisque l'affectation des interviewers est au hasard pour toutes les vagues et dans chacune. Ce plan évite la confusion possible avec d'autres effets dus aux affectations non aléatoire telles que les affectations par quartiers où les meilleurs enquêteurs traitant les cas les plus difficiles. Pour séparer les effets des interviewers, des répondants et des vagues, nous utilisons des models multi-niveaux croisés.
Andersen, A.-M.N. and Olsen, J. ( 2002). Do Interviewers' Health Beliefs and Habits Modify Responses to Sensitive Questions? A Study using Data Collected from Pregnant Women by Means of Computer-assisted Telephone Interviews. American Journal of Epidemiology155 (1), 95-100
2.
Billiet, J. and Loosveldt, G. ( 1988) Improvement of the Quality of Responses to Factual Survey Questions by Interviewer Training. The Public Opinion Quarterly52 (2), pp. 190-211
3.
Brick, J.M., McGuinness, R., Lapham, S.J., Cahalan, M., Owends, D. and Gray, L. ( 1995). Interviewer Variance in two Telephone Surveys . SESTAT Methodological Research Compendium, SESTAT (http://srsstats.sbe.nsf.gov/ )
4.
Campanelli, P. and O'Muircheartaigh C. ( 1999) Interviewers, Interviewer Continuity, and Panel Survey Nonresponse. Quality & Quantity33, pp. 59-76
5.
Campanelli, P. and O'Muircheartaigh C. ( 2002) The importance of experimental Control in testing the Impact of Interviewer Continuity on Panel Survey Nonresponse. Quality & Quantity36, pp. 129-144
6.
Diekmann, A. ( 2005) "Betrug und Täuschung in der Wissenschaft". Datenfälschung, Diagnoseverfahren, Konsequenzen. Swiss Journal of Sociology31 (1), pp. 7-29
7.
Esser, H. ( 193) Response Set: Habit, Frame or Rational Choice? In: Krebs, D. and Schmidt, P. (eds.): New Directions in Attitude Measurement, pp. 293-314. Berlin: de Gruyter
8.
Frick, J.R. and Grabka, M.M. ( 2005). Item nonresponse on income questions in panel surveys: Incidence, imputation and the impact on inequality and mobility. Allgemeines Statistisches Archiv89 (1), pp. 49-61
9.
Gabadinho, A. and Budowski, M. ( 2002) Construction of Income Variables for Wave 2. Swiss Household Panel Discussion Paper 3-02, Neuchâtel
10.
Groves, R.M. and Magilavy, L.J. ( 1986) Measuring and explaining Interviewer Effects in centralised Telephone Surveys. Public Opinion Quarterly50, pp. 251-266
11.
Groves, R.M., Fowler, F.J., Couper, M.P., Lepkowski, J.M., Singer, E. and Tourangeau, R. ( 2004). Survey Methodology. Wiley Series in Survey Methodology .
12.
Heeb, J. and Gmel, G. ( 2001). Interviewers' and respondents' effects on selfreported alcohol consumption in a Swiss health survey. Journal of Studies on Alcohol, July, pp. 434-442
13.
Hill, D. and Willis, R. ( 2001) Reducing Panel Attrition. A Search for effective Policy Instruments. J. Human Resources36 (3), pp. 416-438
14.
Hox, J., de Leeuw, E. and Kreft, I. ( 1991) The Effect of Interviewer and Respondent Characteristics on the Quality of Survey Data: A Multilevel Model. In: Biemer, Groves, Lyberg, Mathiowetz and Sudman (eds.): Measurement Errors in Surveys . New York: Wiley
15.
Jäckle, A., Roberts, C. and Lynn, P. ( 2006) Telephone versus Face-to-Face Interviewing: Mode Effects on Data Quality and likely Causes. Report on Phase II of the ESS-Gallup Mixed Mode Methodology Project. ISER Working Paper, 2006-41, Colchester, University of Essex
16.
Japec, L. ( 2005) Quality issues in interviewer surveys: some contributions . Department of Statistics, Stockholm University. PhD Thesis
17.
Japec, L. ( 2006) Quality issues in interviewer surveys: some contributions . Bulletin de Méthodologie Sociologique90, pp. 26-42
18.
Kennickell, A. ( 2000) What do the "late" Cases tell us? Evidence from the 1998 Survey of Consumer Finances. Paper prepared for the 1999 International Conference on Survey Nonresponse, Portland, Oregon
19.
Krosnick, J.A. ( 1991) Response Strategies for Coping with the Cognitive Demands of Attitude Measures in Surveys. Applied Cognitive Psychology5, pp. 213-236
20.
Laurie, H., Smith, R. and Scott, L. ( 1999) Strategies for Reducing Nonresponse in a Longitudinal Panel Survey, Journal of Official Statistics15, pp. 269-282
21.
Lipps, O. ( 2005). Interviewer and Respondent Effects in CATI Data - a multicriterion, multilevel analysis. Swiss Household Panel Discussion Paper 2-05, Neuchâtel
22.
Lipps, O. ( 2006) Attrition of and within Households in the Swiss Household Panel - Roles of the Reference Person, Other Persons, and the Interviewer in the Course of Time. Swiss Household Panel Working Paper 6-06, Neuchâtel
23.
Lipps, O. ( 2007) Attrition in the Swiss Household Panel. To be published in Methoden, Daten, Analysen 1.
24.
Loosveldt, G. and Carlton, A. ( 1997) Evaluation of Nonresponse in the Belgian Election Panel Study '91-'95. Proceedings of the Survey Research Methods Section, American Statistical Association
25.
Loosveldt, G., Pickery, J. and Billiet, J. ( 2002) Item Nonresponse as a Predictor of Unit Nonresponse in a Panel Survey. Journal of Official Statistics18 (4), pp. 545-557
26.
Mahalanobis, P.C. ( 1946) Recent Experiments in Statistical Sampling in the Indian Statistical Institute. J Royal Statistical Society109, pp. 325-378
27.
Mayer, T.S. ( 2001). Interviewer Attitudes about Privacy and Confidentiality . Research Report Series, Statistical Research Division, U.S. Bureau of the Census
28.
Mensch, B.S. and Kandel, D.B. ( 1988) Underreporting of Substance Use in a National Longitudinal Youth Cohort: Individual and Interviewer Effects. Public Opinion Quarterly52 (1), pp. 100-124
29.
Oksenberg, L. and Cannell, C. ( 1988) Effects of Interviewer vocal Characteristics on Nonresponse . In: Groves, R., Biemer, P., Lyberg, L., Massey, J., Nicholls II, W. and Waksberg, J.: Telephone Survey Methodology. New York: Wiley
30.
O'Muircheartaigh C. and Campanelli, P. ( 1999) A Multilevel Exploration of the Role of Interviewers in Survey Non-Response. J. Royal Statistical Society A162 (3), pp. 437-446
31.
Pannekoek, J. ( 1988). Interviewer Variance in a Telephone Survey. Journal of Official Statistics4 (4), pp. 375-384
32.
Peneff, J. ( 1988) The Observers observed: French Survey Researchers at Work . Social Problems35 (5), pp. 520-535.
33.
Pickery, J. and Loosveldt, G. ( 1998) The impact of Respondent and Interviewer Characteristics on the Number of "No Opinion" answers. Quality & Quantity32, - pp. 31-45
34.
Pickery, J. and Loosveldt, G. ( 2001) An Exploration of Question Characteristics that Mediate Interviewer Effects on Item Nonresponse. Journal of Official Statistics17 (3), pp. 337-350
35.
Pickery, J. and Loosveldt, G. ( 2002). A Multilevel Multinomial Analysis of Interviewer Effects on Various Components of Unit Nonresponse. Quality & Quantity36, pp. 427-37
36.
Pickery, J. and Loosveldt, G. ( 2004). A Simultaneous Analysis of Interviewer Effects on Various Data Quality Indicators with Identification on Exceptional Interviewers . Journal of Official Statistics20 (1), pp. 77-89
37.
Rasbash, J., F. Steele, W. Browne, and B. Prosser ( 2004). A users guide to MLwiN version 2. 0. London, Institute of Education
38.
Scherpenzeel, A. ( 2005). Interviewer Study 2004. Profiles of the MIS interviewers working for the SHP and effects on the data. Swiss Household Panel Discussion Paper 3-05, Neuchâtel .
39.
Schnell, R. ( 1991) Der Einfluss gefälschter Interviews auf Survey-Ergebnisse . Zeitschrift für Soziologie20 (1) pp. 25-35
40.
Schräpler, J.-P. ( 2001). Respondent Behaviour in Panel Studies. A case Study of the German Socio-Economic Panel (SOEP). DIW Discussion Paper244, pp. 118-156
41.
Shoemaker, P.J., Eichholz, M. and Skewes, E.A. ( 2002). Item Nonresponse: Distinguishing between don't Know and Refuse. Int. J. Public Opinion Research14, pp. 193-201
42.
Singer, E., Frankel, M.R. and Glassmann, M.B. ( 1983) The Effect of Interviewer Characteristics and Expectations on Response. Public Opinion Quarterly47 (1), pp. 68-83
43.
Smit, J.H. ( 1993) Suggestive Questioning and Probing in Interviews - Occurrence, Causes and Effects. Faculty of Social Cultural Sciences VU, Department of Social Research Methodology, University of Amsterdam. PhD Thesis.
44.
Smit, J.H., Dijkstra, W. and van der Zouwen, J. ( 1997) Suggestive Interviewer Behaviour in Surveys: An experimental Study. J. Official Statistics13 (1), pp. 19-28
45.
Snijders, T.A.B. and Bosker, R.J. ( 1999). Multilevel analysis. Newbury Park, California: Sage
46.
Snijkers, G., Hox, J. and de Leeuw, E. ( 1999) Interviewer's tactics for Fighting Survey Nonresponse . J. Official Statistics15 (2), pp. 185-198
47.
Spiess, M. and Kroh, M. ( 2005) Documentation of Sample Sizes and Panel Attrition in the German Socio Economic Panel (SOEP) 1984-2004. Data Documentation6, DIW Berlin
48.
Stokes, L. and Yeh, M.-Y. ( 1988) Searching for Causes of Interviewer Effects in Telephone Surveys. In: Groves, R., Biemer, P., Lyberg, L., Massey, J., Nicholls II, W. and Waksberg, J.: Telephone Survey Methodology. New York: Wiley
49.
Stoop, I. ( 2005) The Hunt for the last Respondent: nonresponse in Sample Surveys. PhD Thesis, Utrecht University
50.
van der Zouwen, J. ( 2006) Interviewer and Survey Researcher: Mutual Dependencies . Bulletin de Méthodologie Sociologique89, pp. 49-64
51.
van der Zouwen, J. and Dijkstra, W. ( 1988) Types of inadequate Interviewer Behaviour in Survey Interviews: Their Causes and Effects. Bulletin de Méthodologie Sociologique18, pp. 5-20
52.
van der Zouwen, J. and de Leeuw, E. ( 1989) The Relationship Between Mode of Administration and Quality of Data in Survey Research. Bulletin de Méthodologie Sociologique19, pp. 3-14
53.
van Meter, K. ( 2005) Ongoing Research: Studying Survey Interviewers: A Call for Research and an Overview. Bulletin de Méthodologie Sociologique87, pp. 51-71
54.
Watson, N. and Wooden, M. ( 2004) Sample Attrition in the HILDA Survey. Australian Journal of Labour Economics7 (2), pp. 293-308.
55.
Winkler, N., Kroh, M. and Spiess, M. ( 2006) Entwicklung einer deutschen Kurzskala zur zweidimensionalen Messung von sozialer Erwünschtheit. DIW Discussion Paper 579, DIW Berlin
