Skip to main content

Cross-National Issues in Response Rates

Abstract

After decades of neglecting nonprobability sampling approaches (we still have no textbook on this widespread practice), in recent years there has finally been a breakthrough in academic attention to this approach. This includes formal professional acceptance (e.g. American Association for Public Opinion Research (AAPOR) code) and also increased scientific research attention. This chapter overviews the structure and trends of research conducted on response rates between 1990 and 2015. The overview indicates – mirroring the trend in existing published work – that nonresponse is rarely treated in a comprehensive and integrative manner. The chapter also highlights those research projects where the nonresponse rate, nonresponse bias, data quality and costs are examined simultaneously, using the European Social Survey as an example.

Keywords

  • American Association For Public Opinion Research (AAPOR)
  • European Social Survey (ESS)
  • Non-probability Sampling
  • Response Rate Calculation
  • Vehovar

These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Fig. 6.1

Notes

  1. 1.

    http://www.europeansocialsurvey.org/

  2. 2.

    http://www.oecd.org/site/piaac/

  3. 3.

    Figures related to official statistical surveys are taken from the website of the Statistical Office of Republic of Slovenia, www.stat.si.

  4. 4.

    Source Eurostat: http://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/tgm/table.do?tab=table&init=1&language=en&pcode=tin00134&plugin=1. Available May 10, 2016.

  5. 5.

    http://www.nonresponse.org/

References and Further Reading

  • AAPOR. (2015). The Code of Professional Ethics and Practices. Retrieved from http://www.aapor.org/Standards-Ethics/AAPOR-Code-of-Ethics/AAPOR_Code_Accepted_Version_11302015.aspx

  • AAPOR. (2016). Standard Definitions: Final Dispositions of Case Codes and Outcome Rates for Surveys. Retrieved from http://www.aapor.org/AAPOR_Main/media/publications/Standard-Definitions20169theditionfinal.pdf

  • Ainsaar, M., Lilleoja, L., Lumiste, K., & Roots, A. (2013). ESS mixed Mode Experiment Results in Estonia (CAWI and CAPI Mode Sequential Design). Institute of Sociology and Social Policy, University of Tartu. Retrieved from http://www.yti.ut.ee/sites/default/files/ssi/ess_dace_mixed_mode_ee_report.pdf

  • Berzelak, J., Vehovar, V., & Lozar Manfreda, K. (2015). Web Mode as Part of Mixed – Mode Surveys of the General Population: An Approach to the Evaluation of Costs and Errors. Metodološki zvezki 12(2), 45–68.

    Google Scholar 

  • Billiet, J., & Vehovar, V. (2009). Non-Response Bias in Cross-National Surveys: Designs for Detection and Adjustment in the ESS. Ask 18(1), 3–43.

    Google Scholar 

  • Callegaro, M., Lozar Manfreda, K., & Vehovar, V. (2015). Web Survey Methodology. London: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cooper, D., & Greenaway, M. (2015). Non-probability Survey Sampling in Official Statistics. Office for National Statistics. Retrieved from http://mi.ris.org/uploadi/editor/doc/1462090294nonprobabilitysurveysamplinginofficialstatistics_tcm77-4077571.pdf

  • Dillman, D. (2015). On Climbing Stairs Many Steps at a Time: The New Normal in Survey Methodology. SES seminar at The School of Economics, Washington State University, September 18, 2015. Retrieved from http://ses.wsu.edu/wp-content/uploads/2015/09/DILLMAN-talk-Sept-18-2015.pdf

  • DiSogra, C., & Callegaro, M. (2016). Metrics and Design Tool for Building and Evaluating Probability-Based Online Panels. Social Science Computer Review 34(1), 26–40.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Fuchs, M., Bossert, D., & Stukowski, S. (2013). Response Rate and Nonresponse Bias -Impact of the Number of Contact Attempts on Data Quality in the European Social Survey. Bulletin de Methodologie Sociologique 117(1), 26–45.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Groves, R. M., & Peytcheva, E. (2008). The impact of Nonresponse Rates on Nonresponse Bias. Public Opinion Quarterly 72(2), 67–189.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Lozar Manfreda, K., Bosnjak, M., Berzelak, J., Hass, I., & Vehovar, V. (2008). Web Surveys Versus Other Survey Modes: A Meta-Analysis Comparing Response rates. International Journal of Market Research 50(1), 79–104.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rendtel, U., & Amarov, B. (2015). The Access Panel of German Official Statistics as a Selection Frame. In U. Engel, B. Jann, P. Lynn, A. Scherpenzeel, & P. Sturgis (Eds.), Improving Survey Methods: Lessons from Recent Research (pp. 236–249). New York and London: Routledge Taylor & Francis Group.

    Google Scholar 

  • Roberts, C., Vandenplas, C., & Stähli, M. E. (2014). Evaluating the Impact of Response Enhancement Methods on the Risk of Nonresponse Bias and Survey costs. Survey Research Methods 8(2), 67–80.

    Google Scholar 

  • Slavec, A., & Vehovar, V. (2011). Nonresponse Bias in Readership Surveys. Paper presented at 22nd International Workshop on Household Survey Nonresponse, Bilbao, September 5–7, 2011.

    Google Scholar 

  • Štebe, J. (1995). Nonresponse in Slovene Public Opinion Survey. Metodološki zvezki 10, 21–37.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stoop, I., Billiet, J., Koch, A., & Fitzgerald, R. (2010). Response and Nonresponse Rates in the European Social Survey. In Stoop, I., Billiet, J., Koch, A., & Fitzgerald, R. (Eds.), Improving Survey Response: Lessons Learned from the European Social Survey (pp. 89–113). Chichester, UK: John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Tourangeau, R., Brick, J. M., Lohr, S., & Li, J. (2016). Adaptive and Responsive Survey Designs: A Review and Assessment. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society. Series A. Retrieved from http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/rssa.12186/full

  • Vannieuwenhuyze, J. T. A. (2014). On the Relative Advantage of Mixed-Mode versus Single-Mode Surveys. Survey Research Methods 8(1), 31–42.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vehovar, V., Berzelak, J., & Lozar Manfreda, K. (2010). Mobile Phones in an Environment of Competing Survey Modes: Applying Metric for Evaluation of Costs and Errors. Social Science Computer Review 28(3), 303–318.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Vehovar, V., Toepoel, V., & Steinmetz, S. (2016). Nonprobability Sampling. In C. Wolf, D. Joye, T. W. Smith, & Y.-C. Fu (Eds.), The SAGE Handbook of Survey Methodology (pp. 329–345). London: Sage.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Vasja Vehovar .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

Copyright information

© 2018 The Author(s)

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Vehovar, V., Beullens, K. (2018). Cross-National Issues in Response Rates. In: Vannette, D., Krosnick, J. (eds) The Palgrave Handbook of Survey Research . Palgrave Macmillan, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-54395-6_6

Download citation