National Research Teams

  • Jürgen H. P. Hoffmeyer-Zlotnik
  • Uwe Warner
Part of the SpringerBriefs in Population Studies book series (BRIEFSPOPULAT)


The countries participating in a comparative survey are represented by their national research teams. The present chapter outlines the tasks and responsibilities of these teams. They are responsible for implementing the survey guidelines established by the central project coordinators. Their key tasks include the transfer of the questionnaire to the national level in such a way that it is not only understandable for the general population but also harmonizable for cross-national comparison.


National experts Development of the national questionnaire Cognitive pretesting 


  1. Beatty, P. C., & Willis, G. B. (2007). Research synthesis: The practice of cognitive interviewing. Public Opinion Quarterly, 71(2), 287–311.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. European Commission (2014). Mutual information system on social protection, MISSOC. MISSOC comparative tables database. Retrieved on January 26, 2018.
  3. European Commission & Eurostat (2017a). EU Labour Force Survey. Database user guide. Version: September 2017. Retrieved on January 26, 2018.
  4. European Commission & Eurostat (2017b). European Union Statistics on Income and Living Conditions (EU-SILC). Description of dataset. Retrieved on January 26, 2018.
  5. European Commission & Eurostat (2017c). Household Budget Surveys (HBS). Description of the HBS scientific-use files. Retrieved on January 26, 2018.
  6. European Social Survey. Retrieved on January 26, 2018.
  7. Hoffmeyer-Zlotnik, J. H. P., & Warner, U. (2009). Private household concepts and their operationalisation in cross-national social surveys. Metodološki zvezki, 6(1), 1–26.Google Scholar
  8. Hoffmeyer-Zlotnik, J. H. P., & Warner, U. (2015). Design and development of the income measures in the European Social Surveys. Metodološki zvezki, 12(2), 85–110.Google Scholar
  9. Johnson T. P., & Braun, M. (2016). Challenges of comparative survey research. In: C. Wolf, D. Joye, T. W. Smith, & Y.-C. Fu (Eds.), The SAGE handbook of survey methodology (pp. 41–53). London: Sage.Google Scholar
  10. Miller, K., & Willis, G. B. (2016). Cognitive models of answering processes. In C. Wolf, D. Joye, T. W. Smith, & Y.-C. Fu (Eds.), The SAGE handbook of survey methodology (pp. 210–217). London: Sage.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Presser, S., Couper, M. C., Lessler, J. T., Martin, E., Martin, J., Rothgeb, J. M., et al. (2004). Methods for testing and evaluating survey questions. Public Opinion Quarterly, 68(1), 109–130.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Schnell, R. (2012). Survey-interviews. Methoden standardisierter Befragungen. Lehrbuch. Studienskripten zur Soziologie. Wiesbaden: VS Verlag.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Schuman, H. (1966). The random probe: A technique for evaluating the validity of closed questions. American Sociological Review, 31(2), 218–222.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Statistics Sweden (2004). Design your questions right. How to develop, test, evaluate and improve questionnaires. Research and Development. Statistics Sweden, Statistiska centralbyrån. Retrieved on January 26, 2018.
  15. UNESCO-UIS (2018). ISCED mappings. Retrieved on January 26, 2018.

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Institute of Political ScienceJustus Liebig University GiessenGiessenGermany
  2. 2.Methodenzentrum SozialwissenschaftenGeorg-August-Universität GöttingenGöttingenGermany

Personalised recommendations