Pierannunzi Carol, Gamble Sonya, Locke Robynne, Freedner Naomi, Town Machell
Division of Population Health, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
ICF International.
Surv Pract. 2019 Aug;12(1):1-12. doi: 10.29115/sp-2019-0006.
Research on mode of administration of surveys increasingly appears in the literature. Little research includes comparisons by sample frame as well as by mode. This research examines differences in efficiency using two types of sample frames (address-based samples [ABS] or random digit dialing [RDD] samples) and multiple modes (web-based surveys, mailed questionnaire, and telephone interview) among adult respondents. Matching telephone numbers to addresses was conducted on both samples. A test of the effectiveness of making modifications to drop point locations in the ABS was also undertaken. A higher proportion of addresses were matched to telephone numbers in an ABS but with less accuracy than matching telephone numbers to addresses in an RDD sample. Costs per competed interview were lower using the RDD than when using the ABS. Efforts to specify apartment numbers in drop point locations in the ABS were not found to be cost effective. Overall, for both demographic and substantive question outcomes, survey frame has less of an impact than survey mode on measures of response rate and cost.
关于调查管理模式的研究在文献中越来越常见。很少有研究同时按抽样框和管理模式进行比较。本研究考察了成年受访者中使用两种抽样框(基于地址的样本[ABS]或随机数字拨号[RDD]样本)和多种管理模式(网络调查、邮寄问卷和电话访谈)时的效率差异。对两个样本都进行了电话号码与地址的匹配。还对在ABS中修改投递点位置的有效性进行了测试。在ABS中,与电话号码匹配的地址比例更高,但准确性低于在RDD样本中电话号码与地址的匹配。使用RDD时完成每次访谈的成本低于使用ABS时。在ABS中指定投递点位置的公寓号码的努力未发现具有成本效益。总体而言,对于人口统计学和实质性问题的结果,调查抽样框对回复率和成本衡量指标的影响小于调查管理模式。