We now commonly choose the mode through which we communicate. For example, if immediate feedback is needed a phone call makes sense; otherwise, an email message is fine. Similarly, if a written record of the exchange is desirable, email or text is appropriate; otherwise, phone is better. Smartphones and tablets make mode choice particularly easy and routine: the options can be selected from a single device with one finger movement or voice command. Can this kind of mode choice add value to the survey enterprise by, for example, increasing respondents’ commitment to the task when answering in a mode they have chosen? We conducted an experiment to explore how mode choice affects data quality, completion and satisfaction. 1268 iPhone users were contacted on their iPhones by either a human or automated interviewer via voice or SMS text. This created four modes: Human Voice, Human Text, Automated Voice, and Automated Text. In half of the initial contacts, respondents were able to choose their interview mode (which could be the contact mode); in the remaining half the mode was simply assigned. Overall, more than half the mode choices involved a mode switch. But just being able to choose (whether switching or not) improved data quality: when respondents chose the interview mode, there was less satisficing (rounded numerical answers and non-differentiation) than when the mode was assigned. There was a small loss of participants at the point the choice was made but those who began the interview in a mode they chose were more likely to complete it than respondents interviewed in an assigned mode. Finally, those who chose their interview mode were more satisfied with the experience than those who were interviewed in an assigned mode. The results point to clear benefits from mode choice and the importance of further exploration.