Abstract
Statistical offices in Europe, in particular the Federal Statistical Office in Germany, are meeting users’ ever more demanding requirements with innovative and appropriate responses, such as the multiple sources mixed-mode design model. This combines various objectives: reducing survey costs and the burden on interviewees, and maximising data quality. The same improvements are also being sought by way of the systematic use of pretests to optimise survey documents. This paper provides a first impression of the many procedures available. An ideal pretest combines both quantitative and qualitative test methods. Quantitative test procedures can be used to determine how often particular input errors arise. The questionnaire is tested in the field in the corresponding survey mode. Qualitative test procedures can find the reasons for input errors. Potential interviewees are included in the questionnaire tests, and their feedback on the survey documentation is systematically analysed and used to upgrade the questionnaire. This was illustrated in our paper by an example from business statistics (“Umstellung auf die Wirtschaftszweigklassifikation 2008” – Change-over to the 2008 economic sector classification). This pretest not only gave important clues about how to improve the contents, but also helped to realistically estimate the organisational cost of the main survey.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
Biemer, P. P., & Fecso, R. S. (1995). Evaluating and controlling measurement error in business surveys. In B. Cox, et al. (Eds.), Business survey methods (pp. 257–281). New York: Wiley.
Blanke, K., Gauckler, B., & Sattelberger, S. (2008) Fragebogen auf dem Prüfstand: Testmethoden und deren Einsatz in der amtlichen Statistik. Wirtschaft und Statistik, 8, 641–649.
Blanke, K., Gauckler, B., & Wein, E. (2007) Pretest zur Jahreserhebung im Binnenhandel. In Methoden – Verfahren – Entwicklungen, Nachrichten aus dem Statistischen Bundesamt 2 (pp. 11–14). Retrieved from http://www.destatis.de/jetspeed/portal/cms/Sites/destatis/Internet/DE/Content/Wissenschaftsforum/MethodenVerfahren/Infos/MethodenVerfahrenEntwicklungen.
Eurostat. (2006a). Handbook of recommended practices for questionnaire development and testing in the European statistical system. Luxemburg: Author. Retrieved from http://epp.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/pls/portal/docs/PAGE/PGP_DS_QUALITY/TAB47143266/RPSQDET27062006_0_0.PDF.
Eurostat. (2006b). Handbook of recommended practices for questionnaire development and testing in the European statistical system. Luxemburg: Author. Retrieved from http://epp.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/portal/page?_pageid=2273,1,2273_47143267&_dad=portal&_schema=PORTAL#METH.
Fowler, F. J. (2004). The case for more split-sample experiments in developing survey instruments. In S. Presser, et al. (Eds.) methods for testing and evaluating survey questionnaires (pp. 173–188). New York: John Wiley.
Gauckler, B., Körner, T., & Minkel, H. (2007). Arbeitgebersozialbeiträge und Beiträge zur Altersvorsorge – Ergebnisse einer Machbarkeitsstudie. Wirtschaft und Statistik, 3, 247–259
Krueger, R. A., & Casey, M. A. (2002). Focus groups. Practical guide for applied research (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publication.
Martin, E. (2004). Vignettes and respondent debriefing for questionnaire design and evaluation. In S. Presser, et al. (Eds.), Methods for testing and evaluating survey questionnaires (pp. 149–172). New York: Wiley.
Prüfer, P., & Rexrodt, M. (2005). Kognitive interviews. In ZUMA How-to-series No 15. Mannheim. Retrieved from http://www.gesis.org/fileadmin/upload/forschung/publikationen/gesis_reihen/howto/How_to15PP_MR.pdf.
Tourangeau, R., Rips, L. J., & Rasinski, K. (2000) The psychology of survey response. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
US Census Bureau. (2003). Census bureau standard. Pretesting questionnaires and related materials for surveys and censuses. Washington D.C.: Author. Retrieved from http://www.census.gov/srd/pretest-standards.pdf.
Willis, G. B. (2005). Cognitive interviewing – A tool for improving questionnaire design. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2009 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg
About this paper
Cite this paper
Radermacher, W., Sattelberger, S. (2009). Statistical Processes Under Change: Enhancing Data Quality with Pretests. In: Fink, A., Lausen, B., Seidel, W., Ultsch, A. (eds) Advances in Data Analysis, Data Handling and Business Intelligence. Studies in Classification, Data Analysis, and Knowledge Organization. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-01044-6_6
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-01044-6_6
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg
Print ISBN: 978-3-642-01043-9
Online ISBN: 978-3-642-01044-6
eBook Packages: Mathematics and StatisticsMathematics and Statistics (R0)