A Note on Improving Contact Times in Panel Surveys

Abstract

With increasing costs for conducting surveys, many survey agencies resort to implementing call strategies. Obtaining contact in panel surveys as early as possible, without annoying people by contacting them at undesired times and ultimately causing them to refuse, requires using efficient call time strategies. In this research, the author uses call data from the Swiss Household Panel (SHP), a centralized Computer Assisted Telephone Interview (CATI) survey with a randomized (experimental) call-household assignment. Using random effects models, the author analyzes the efficiency gains of obtaining initial contact by assigning optimal times to first calls, and times and spacing to second and later calls depending on household sociodemography and prior call patterns. The author concludes with some recommendations for making early and successful contact during fieldwork.

Keywords

call data paradata CATI calling time random assignment

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

AAPOR (The American Association for Public Opinion Research). 2009. Standard definitions: Final dispositions of case codes and outcome rates for surveys. 6th ed. Lenexa, KS: AAPOR.

Barton

1999. An analysis of the availability of individuals at home. Survey Methodology Bulletin 45:16–25.

Beerten

1999. The effect of interviewer and area characteristics on survey response rates: An exploratory analysis. Survey Methodology Bulletin 45:7–15.

Brick

Allen

Cunningham

Maklan

1996. Outcomes of a calling protocol in a telephone survey. Proceedings of the Survey Research Methods Section. Alexandria, VA: American Statistical Association.

D’Arrigo

Durrant

Steele

2009. Using field process data to predict best times of contact conditioning on household and interviewer influences. S3RI Methodology Working Papers M09/12, Statistical Sciences Research Institute, University of Southampton, Southampton.

De Heer

De Leeuw

2002. Trends in household survey nonresponse: A longitudinal and international comparison. In Survey nonresponse, ed. Groves

Dillman

Eltinge

Little

41–54. New York: Wiley.

Dennis

Saulsberry

Battaglia

Rodén

A.-S.

Hoaglin

Frankel

Smith

Wright

1999. Analysis of call patterns in a large random-digit-dialing survey: The National Immunization Survey. Paper presented at the International Conference on Survey Nonresponse, Portland, Oregon.

Greenberg

Stokes

1990. Developing an optimal call scheduling strategy for a telephone survey. Journal of Official Statistics 6:421–35.

Groves

Couper

1998. Nonresponse in household interview surveys. New York: Wiley.

10.

Groves

Fowler

Couper

Lepkowski

Singer

Tourangeau

2004. Survey methodology. New York: Wiley.

11.

Koch

Blom

Stoop

Kappelhof

2009. Data collection quality assurance in cross-national surveys: The example of the ESS. Methoden-Daten-Analysen 3:219–47.

12.

Kulka

R. A.

Weeks

M. F.

1988. Toward the development of optimal calling protocols for telephone surveys: A conditional probabilities approach. Journal of Official Statistics 4:319–32.

13.

Lipps

Benson

2005. Cross-national contact strategies. 2005 Proceedings of the American Statistical Association, Section on Survey Research Methods. Alexandria, VA: American Statistical Association.

14.

Purdon

Campanelli

Sturgis

1999. Interviewers’ calling strategies on face-to-face interview surveys. Journal of Official Statistics 15:199–216.

15.

Stoop

2005. The hunt for the last respondent: Nonresponse in sample surveys. PhD thesis, Utrecht University, Utrecht, Netherlands.

16.

Stoop

Billiet

Koch

Fitzgerald

2010. Improving survey response: Lessons learned from the European Social Survey. Chichester, UK: Wiley.

17.

Weeks

Kulka

Pierson

1987. Optimal call scheduling for a telephone survey. Public Opinion Quarterly 51:540–49.