Web Survey Bibliography
Title Controlling Nonresponse in the Current Employment Statistics Survey
Access date 22.07.2004
Full text doc (224k)
Abstract Timely collection of data is a top priority in all surveys. As a result, most surveys have procedures in place to control/minimize nonresponse. The Current Employment Statistics (CES) survey is no different from other survey agencies in this respect. CES is a monthly panel survey of about 370,000 business establishments conducted by the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS). CES provides one of the earliest estimates of employment, hours, and earnings at the national, State, and metropolitan area levels. CES data, widely viewed as a major economic indicator, are published each month after only two and a half weeks of collection. This restricted collection period places a huge burden on the collection method and magnifies importance of the procedures used to maximize response.CES spends significant time and resources re-contacting non-respondents in an attempt to encourage them to report. These efforts involve setting a fixed 'cutoff' date for the receipt of data, and following-up with those sample units that do not respond by the predetermined date. CES has developed a model for determining when to re-contact a non-respondent, and uses a mixed mode of contact for nonresponse prompting. This paper describes what activities are performed in the CES program to maximize response while minimizing workload, costs, and respondent burden in an automated self-response collection environment. We will discuss the mode, timing, and content of the various re-contact methods. We will measure the effectiveness of our re-contact efforts, including a comparison by mode between prompting non-respondents by phone, FAX, and e-mail. Each mode has its own advantages and disadvantages, which we will discuss as well.
Access/Direct link Homepage - conference (full text)
Year of publication1999
Bibliographic typeConferences, workshops, tutorials, presentations
Web Survey Bibliography - Survey methodology (2446)
- The Impact of Personalized Prenotification on Response Rates to an Electronic Survey; 2009; Hart, A. M., Brennan, C. W., Sym, D., Larson, E.
- Introduction to the Special Issue on Web Surveys ; 2009; Witte, J. C.
- Effects of Design in Web Surveys: Comparing Trained and Fresh Respondents ; 2009; Toepoel, V., Das, M., van Soest, A.
- Social Desirability Bias in CATI, IVR, and Web Surveys: The Effects of Mode and Question Sensitivity...; 2009; Kreuter, F., Presser, S., Tourangeau, R.
- Eye-Tracking Data: New Insights on Response Order Effects and Other Cognitive Shortcuts in Survey Responding...; 2009; Galesic, M., Tourangeau, R., P.;Couper, M. P., Conrad, F. G.
- Web Survey Methods: Introduction; 2009; Couper, M. P., Miller, P. V.
- Coverage- und Nonresponse-Effekte bei Online-Bevölkerungsumfragen ; 2009; Bandilla, W., Kaczmirek, L., Blohm, M., Neubarth, W.
- Computing Response Metrics for Online Panels; 2009; Callegaro, M., DiSogra, C.
- Web‐Based Surveys: Not Your Basic Survey Anymore; 2009; Bertot, J. C.
- Estimation for Volunteer Panel Web Surveys Using Propensity Score Adjustment and Calibration Adjustment...; 2009; Lee, S., Valliant, R. L.
- Selection Bias in Web Surveys and the Use of Propensity Scores; 2009; Schonlau, M., van Soest, A., Kapteyn, A., Couper, M. P.
- Mobile phone surveys in mixed mode environment; 2009; Vehovar, V.
- Response rate and measurement differences in mixed-mode surveys using mail, telephone, interactive voice...; 2009; Dillman, D. A., Phelps, G., Tortora, R. D., Swift, K., Kohrell, J., Berck, J., Messer, B. L.
- Usability testing; 2008; Roe, D. J.
- The semantic differential technique; 2008; Stoutenborough, J. W.
- The advisory panel on online public opinion survey quality - Final report June 4, 2008; 2008
- Testing survey questions; 2008; Campanelli, P.
- Telephone survey methodology: Adapting to change; 2008; Tucker, C., Lepkowski, J. M.
- Survey documentation: Towards professional knowledge management in sample surveys; 2008; Mohler, P. et al.
- Some consequences of survey mode changes in longitudinal surveys; 2008; Dillman, D. A.
- Representativity of web surveys – an illusion?; 2008; Bethlehem, J.
- Privacy, confidentiality, and response burden as factors in telephone survey nonresponse; 2008; Singer, E., Presser, S.
- Mode effects; 2008; Jans, M.
- Mobile web surveys: A preliminary discussion of methodological implications; 2008; Fuchs, M.
- Missing data; 2008; de Leeuw, E. D., Hox, J.
- Measuring customer satisfaction and loyalty, Third Edition: Survey design, use, and statistical analysis...; 2008; Hayes, B. E.
- History of the browser user agent string; 2008; Andersen, A.
- Heuristics and biases as measures of critical thinking: Associations with cognitive ability and thinking...; 2008; West, R. F., Toplak, M. E., Stanovich, K. E.
- Foundation of quality project overview; 2008
- Email survey; 2008; Porter, S. R.
- Effects of using a grid versus a sequential form of the ACS basic demographic data; 2008; Chesnut, J.
- Designing online election surveys: Lessons from the 2004 Australian election; 2008; Gibson, R., McAllister, I.
- An unwanted impact; 2008; Balden, W.
- Access panels and online research, panacea or pitfall? Proceedings of the DABS symposium, Amsterdam,...; 2008; Stoop, I.
- Mixed Modes and Measurement Error: Study design and literature review; 2008; Hope, S., Nicolaas, G.
- Forms that Work - Designing Web Forms for Usability; 2008; Jarrett, C., Gaffney, G.
- Understanding Society. Some preliminary results from the Wave 1 Innovation Panel ; 2008; Burton, J., Laurie, H., Uhrig, S.C. N.
- Design Variations in Adaptive Web Sampling; 2008; Vincent, K. S.
- Human-Survey Interaction: Usability and Nonresponse in Online Surveys; 2008; Kaczmirek, L.
- Characteristics of Gay and Bisexual Men Who Drop Out of a Web Survey of Sexual Behaviour in the UK; 2008; Evans, A. R., Wiggins, D., Bolding, G., Elford, J.
- Internet-basierte Messung sozialer Erwünschtheit: Theoretische Grundlagen und experimentelle Untersuchung...; 2008; Kaufmann, E., Reips, U. -D.
- Sozialforschung im Internet: Methodologie und Praxis der Online-Befragung; 2008; Jackob, N., Schoen, H., Zerback, T. (eds.)
- An online panel as a platform for multi-disciplinary research; 2008; Scherpenzeel, A.
- Comparison of Web-Based versus Paper-and-Pencil Self-Administered Questionnaire: Effects on Health Indicators...; 2008; van de Looij-Jansen, P. M., de Wilde, E. J.
- Choosing the right approach comes down to serving each project's needs; 2008; Turner, S.
- Comparing river respondents to panelists; 2008; Brien, D., Courtright, M., Stark, M.
- Quality matters when designing panel questionnaires; 2008; Cape, P., Lorch, J., Piekarski, L.
- Protecting online survey data integrity; 2008; Gwinner, C.
- By the Numbers: The pros and cons of sampling modes; 2008; Piekarski, L.
- Does interactivity hold the key to respondent engagement?; 2008; Sleep, D., Puleston, J.