Wagner James, Arrieta Jennifer, Guyer Heidi, Ofstedal Mary Beth
University of Michigan, Survey Research Center.
Field methods. 2014 May 1;26(2):141-155. doi: 10.1177/1525822X13491863.
Interest in a multi-mode approach to surveys has grown substantially in recent years, in part due to increased costs of face-to-face interviewing and the emergence of the internet as a survey mode. Yet, there is little systematic evidence of the impact of a multimode approach on survey costs and errors. This paper reports the results of an experiment designed to evaluate whether a mixed-mode approach to a large screening survey would produce comparable response rates at a lower cost than a face-to-face screening effort. The experiment was carried out in the Health and Retirement Study (HRS), an ongoing panel study of Americans over age 50. In 2010, HRS conducted a household screening survey to recruit new sample members to supplement the existing sample. The experiment varied the sequence of modes with which the screening interview was delivered. One treatment offered mail first, followed by face-to-face interviewing; the other started with face-to-face and then mail. A control group was offered only face-to-face interviewing. Results suggest that the mixed mode options reduced costs without reducing response rates to the screening interview. There is some evidence, however, that the sequence of modes offered may impact the response rate for a follow-up in-depth interview.
近年来，人们对多模式调查方法的兴趣大幅增长，部分原因是面对面访谈成本增加以及互联网作为一种调查模式的出现。然而，几乎没有系统的证据表明多模式方法对调查成本和误差的影响。本文报告了一项实验的结果，该实验旨在评估大型筛查调查的混合模式方法是否能以低于面对面筛查的成本产生可比的回应率。该实验在健康与退休研究（HRS）中进行，这是一项对50岁以上美国人进行的持续跟踪研究。2010年，HRS进行了一项家庭筛查调查，以招募新的样本成员来补充现有样本。实验改变了进行筛查访谈的模式顺序。一种处理方式是先邮寄，然后进行面对面访谈；另一种则先进行面对面访谈，然后邮寄。一个对照组只提供面对面访谈。结果表明，混合模式选项降低了成本，同时没有降低筛查访谈的回应率。然而，有一些证据表明，提供的模式顺序可能会影响后续深度访谈的回应率。
