Comparative Analysis of Within-Household Respondent Selection Techniques

A probability sample of households frequently must be translated into a sample of persons representing characteristics of the adult population. Researchers have developed at least 14 within-household respondent selection procedures or their variants to accomplish this task. Although probability methods are preferable, they often increase nonresponse. Quasi-probability and nonprobability techniques have been devised to increase cooperation and decrease costs, although they sacrifice the advantages of randomness. The purpose of this paper is to analyze the results of 16 studies th at have compared within-household respondent selection procedures, with respect to demographic represen- tativeness, cooperation or response rates, and costs. Although there is an increasing need to hold down costs yet maintain quality and accuracy as response rates are falling, little sy stematic, accessible evidence exists to guide choice of respondent selection method.

[1]  J. Michael Brick,et al.  A Minimally Intrusive Method for Sampling Persons in Random Digit Dial Surveys , 2004 .

[2]  Gtista Forsman.  SAMPLING INDIVIDUALS WITHIN HOUSEHOLDS IN TELEPHONE SURVEYS , 2002 .

[3]  N. Hall,et al.  WITHIN-HO USEHOLD SELECTION : IS ANYBODY LISTENING ? , 2002 .

[4]  K. Lind.  " A Comparison of the Accuracy of the Last Birthday versus the Next Birthday Methods for Random Selection of Household Respondents " , 2002 .

[5]  B. Grandjean,et al.  Is Target Selection by Last Birthday ‘ Random Enough ’ ? A Split-Ballot Test * , 2002 .

[6]  Renata Nemeth Hungary.  Respondent selection within the household-A modification of the Kish grid , 2002 .

[7]  J. Catania,et al.  Random Selection in a National Telephone Survey: A Comparison of the Kish, Next-Birthday, and Last-Birthday Methods , 2000 .

[8]  Matthew Salo.  Nonresponse in Household Interview Surveys , 1999 .

[9]  Paul C. Hardin,et al.  Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American , 1999 .

[10]  R. Groves,et al.  Survey Errors and Survey Costs. , 1991 .

[11]  Paul J. Lavrakas,et al.  Telephone survey methods : sampling, selection, and supervision , 1988 .

[12]  Michael W. Traugott.  THE IMPORTANCE OF PERSISTENCE IN RESPONDENT SELECTION FOR PREELECTION SURVEYS , 1987 .

[13]  R. Woolson,et al.  Kish Method for Mail Survey Respondent Selection , 1986 .

[14]  Dan E. Hagan,et al.  Must Respondent Selection Procedures for Telephone Surveys Be Invasive , 1983 .

[15]  J. Blair,et al.  Improving Random Respondent Selection in Telephone Surveys , 1983 .

[16]  C. T. Salmon,et al.  The Next-Birthday Method of Respondent Selection , 1983 .

[17]  Ronald Czaja,et al.  Respondent Selection in a Telephone Survey: A Comparison of Three Techniques , 1982 .

[18]  Robert M. Groves,et al.  Surveys by Telephone: A National Comparison With Personal Interviews. , 1980 .

[19]  Barbara E. Bryant,et al.  Respondent Selection in a Time of Changing Household Composition , 1975 .

[20]  W. Paisley,et al.  A COMPUTER-GENERATED SAMPLING TABLE FOR SELECTING RESPONDENTS WITHIN HOUSEHOLDS , 1965 .

[21]  Verling C. Troldahl,et al.  Random Selection of Respondents within Households in Phone Surveys , 1964 .

[22]  Alfred Politz,et al.  Note on “An Attempt to Get the Not-at-Homes into the Sample Without Callbacks” , 1950 .

[23]  Leslie Kish,et al.  A Procedure for Objective Respondent Selection within the Household , 1949 .

[24]  A. Politz,et al.  An Attempt to Get the “Not at Homes” into the Sample Without Callbacks , 1949 .