Fieldwork Monitoring in Telephone Surveys

  • Patrick Schmich
  • Franziska Jentsch


In Germany, the telephone as a mode is still most commonly used for collecting quantitative data in empirical market and social research (e.g. ). Although a number of problems – such as declining response rates (e.g. Curtin et al. 2005) and a constantly changing telecommunications market – make it necessary to try out new access routes (e.g. online surveys), and although these are increasingly being used, there is a lack of methods for generating samples for representative online surveys (Faas 2003, Couper and Coutts 2006, AAPOR 2010). While online surveys are a quick and inexpensive instrument (for example, for questioning the members of an access panel), telephone and randomly generated samples for telephone surveys still play an important role for low-cost, population-based representative surveys.


Telephone Survey Phone Number Telephone Number Late Shift Target Person 
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.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. AAPOR (American Association for Public Opinion Research), Standard definitions. Final disposition codes and outcome rates for surveys. Lenexa, Kansas (2010)Google Scholar
  2. ADM (Arbeitskreis Deutscher Markt- und Sozialforschungsinstitute e.V.) (Working Group of German Market and Social Research Institutes), Richtlinie für telefonische Befragungen (Guidelines for Telephone Surveys) (2008)Google Scholar
  3. Asef, D., Riede, T.: Kontaktzeiten in einer Telefonerhebung – wie beeinflussen sie die Messung der Erwerbstätigkeit ? (Contact times in telephone surveys – how do they influence the measurement of employment?). In: Bundesamt, S. (ed.) Wirtschaft und Statistik, Wiesbaden, vol. 6, pp. 581–586 (2006)Google Scholar
  4. Brauns, H., Steinmann, S.: Educational reform in France, West Germany and the United Kingdom: updating the CASMIN educational classification. ZUMA-Nachrichten 23, 7–44 (1999)Google Scholar
  5. Buckley, P., Dennis, J.M., Saulsberry, C., Coronado, V.G., Ezzati-Rice, T., Maes, E., Rodin, A., Wright, R.A.: Managing 78 simultaneous RDD samples. In: Proceedings of the Section on Survey Research Methods, pp. 957–961. American Statistical Association, Alexandria (1998)Google Scholar
  6. Couper, M.P., Coutts, E.: Online-Befragung. Probleme und Chancen verschiedener Arten von Online-Erhebungen (Online surveys. Problems and opportunities of different kinds of online survey). In: Dieckmann, A. (ed.) Methoden der Sozialforschung. Kölner Zeitschrift für Soziologie und Sozialpsychologie, vol. 44, pp. 217–243. VS Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften, GWV Fachverlage GmbH, Wiesbaden (2006)Google Scholar
  7. Curtin, R., Presser, S., Singer, E.: Changes in telephone survey nonresponse over the past quarter century. Public Opinion Quarterly 69, 87–98 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. De Leeuw, E.D., De Heer, W.: Trends in household survey nonresponse: A longitudinal and international comparison. In: Groves, R.M., et al. (eds.) Survey Nonresponse, pp. 41–54. Wiley, New York (2002)Google Scholar
  9. Deutschmann, M., Häder, S.: Nicht-Eingetragene in CATI-Surveys (Unlisted numbers in CATI surveys). In: Gabler, S., et al. (eds.) Telefonstichproben: Methodische Innovationen und Anwendungen in Deutschland, Waxmann, pp. 68–84 (2002)Google Scholar
  10. Faas, T.: Umfragen im Umfeld der Bundestagswahl 2002: Offline und Online im Vergleich (Surveys in the context of the 2002 federal parliamentary elections: offline and online, a comparison). ZA-Informationen 52, 120–135 (2003)Google Scholar
  11. Glemser, A.: ADM-Telefonstichproben in der Praxis (ADM telephone samples in practice). In: Gabler, S., et al. (eds.) Telefonstichproben Methodische Innovationen und Anwendungen in Deutschland, Waxmann, pp. 46–58 (2002)Google Scholar
  12. Häder, S.: Wer sind die »Nonpubs«? Zum Problem anonymer Anschlüsse bei Telefonumfragen (Who are the ’nonpubs’? On the problem of anonymous phone lines in telephone surveys). ZUMA-Nachrichten 39, 45–68 (1996)Google Scholar
  13. Häder, S., Gabler, S.: Ein neues Stichprobendesign für telefonische Umfragen in Deutschland (A new sample design for telefone surveys in Germany). In: Gabler, S., et al. (eds.) Telefonstichproben in Deutschland, pp. 69–88. Westdeutscher Verlag, Opladen (1998)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Häder, S., Gabler, S.: Generierung von Telefonstichproben mit TelSuSa (Generating telephone samples with TelSuSa). ZUMA-Nachrichten 44, 138–143 (1999)Google Scholar
  15. Häder, S., Gabler, S., Heckel, C., et al.: Stichprobenziehung, Gewichtung und Realisierung (Drawing samples, weighting, realization). In: Häder, S., Häder, M. (eds.) Telefonbefragungen über das Mobilfunknetz: Konzept, Design und Umsetzung einer Strategie zur Datenerhebung, pp. 21–82. VS Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften, Wiesbaden (2009)Google Scholar
  16. Hansen, S.E.: CATI Sample Management Systems. In: Lepkowski, J.M., et al. (eds.) Advances in Telephone Survey Methodology, pp. 340–385. Wiley, New Jersey (2008)Google Scholar
  17. Hartmann, P., Schimpl-Neimanns, B.: The representativity of sociodemographic features of Allbus multivariant analyses regarding the middle-class bias in survey research. ZUMA-Arbeitsbericht 1 (1992)Google Scholar
  18. Hüfken, V.: Kontaktierung bei Telefonumfragen. Auswirkungen auf das Kooperations- und Antwortverhalten (Contacting in telephone surveys. Effects on cooperation and response behavior). In: Hüfken, V. (ed.) Methoden in Telefonumfragen, pp. 11–31. Westdeutscher Verlag, Opladen (2000)Google Scholar
  19. Kohler, M., Rieck, A., Borch, S., Ziese, T.: Erster telefonischer Gesundheitssurvey des Robert Koch-Instituts – methodische Beiträge (The Robert Koch Institute’s first telephone health survey – methodological contributions). In: Beiträge zur Gesundheitsberichterstattung des Bundes, Robert Koch-Inst., Berlin (2005)Google Scholar
  20. Kurth, B.M., Lange, C., Kamtsiuris, P., Hölling, H.: Gesundheitsmonitoring am Robert Koch-Institut – Sachstand und Perspektiven (Health monitoring at the Robert Koch Institute – current position and prospects). Bundesgesundheitsblatt – Gesundheitsforschung – Gesundheitsschutz 52(5), 557–570 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Rat der Deutschen Markt- und Sozialforschung e.V (Council of German Market and Social Research). Richtlinie für telefonische Befragungen (Guidelines for Telephone Surveys) (2008), (accessed February 01, 2011)
  22. RKI (Robert Koch-Institut) Daten und Fakten: Ergebnisse der Studie ”in Deutschland aktuell 2009“ (Data and facts: results of the "German Health Update" 2009). In: Beiträge zur Gesundheitsberichterstattung des Bundes. Robert Koch-Inst., Berlin (2011)Google Scholar
  23. Schmitt-Beck, R., Faas, T., Holst, C.: Der Rolling Cross-Section Survey – ein Instrument zur Analyse dynamischer Prozesse der Einstellungsentwicklung (The Rolling Cross-Section Survey – an instrument for analysing dynamic opinion-development processes). Bericht zur ersten deutschen RCS-Studie anlässlich der Bundestagswahl 2005 (Report of the first RCS study on the occasion of the federal parliamentary elections in 2005). ZUMA-Nachrichten 58, 13–49 (2006)Google Scholar
  24. Schnauber, A., Daschmann, G.: States or traits? Factors influencing the willingness to participate in telephone surveys. Methoden — Daten — Analysen 2(2), 97–123 (2008)Google Scholar
  25. Sudman, S.: Survey research and ethics. Advances in Consumer Research 25, 69–71 (1998)Google Scholar
  26. Swires-Hennessy, E., Drake, M.: The optimum time at which to conduct survey interviews. International Journal of Market Research 34(1), 61 (1992)Google Scholar
  27. Von der Heyde, C.: Das ADM-Telefonstichproben-Modell (The ADM telephone sample model). In: Gabler, S., et al. (eds.) Telefonstichproben: Methodische Innovationen und Anwendungen in Deutschland, Waxmann, pp. 32–45 (2002)Google Scholar
  28. Waksberg, J.: Sampling methods for random digit dialing. Journal of the American Statistical Association 73, 40–46 (1978)Google Scholar
  29. Weeks, M.F., Kulka, R.A., Pierson, S.A.: Optimal call scheduling for telephone survey. Public Opinion Quarterly 51, 540–549 (1987)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Berlin Heidelberg 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  • Patrick Schmich
    • 1
  • Franziska Jentsch
    • 1
  1. 1.The Robert Koch InstituteBerlinGermany

Personalised recommendations