What Is A Survey?: Fritz Scheuren
What Is A Survey?: Fritz Scheuren
What Is A Survey?: Fritz Scheuren
Fritz Scheuren
What is a survey? 2
INDEX
1. What is a Survey?
It has been said the United States is no longer an "industrial society" but an
"information society." That is, our major problems and tasks no longer mainly
center on the production of the goods and services necessary for survival and
comfort.
Our "society," thus, requires a prompt and accurate flow of information on
preferences, needs, and behavior. It is in response to this critical need for
information on the part of the government, business, and social institutions that so
much reliance is placed on surveys.
about 1,000 persons to get reasonable information about national attitudes and
opinions.
When it is realized that a properly selected sample of only 1,000 individuals can
reflect various characteristics of the total population, it is easy to appreciate the
value of using surveys to make informed decisions in a complex society such as
ours. Surveys provide a speedy and economical means of determining facts about
our economy and about people's knowledge, attitudes, beliefs, expectations, and
behaviors.
• Major TV networks rely on surveys to tell them how many and what types of
people are watching their programs
• Statistics Canada conducts continuing panel surveys of children (and their
families) to study educational and other needs
• Auto manufacturers use surveys to find out how satisfied people are with
their cars
• The U.S. Bureau of the Census conducts a survey each month to obtain
information on employment and unemployment in the nation
• The U.S. Agency for Health Care Policy and Research sponsors a periodic
survey to determine how much money people are spending for different
types of medical care
• Local transportation authorities conduct surveys to acquire information on
commuting and travel habits
• Magazine and trade journals use surveys to find out what their subscribers
are reading
• Surveys are conducted to ascertain who uses our national parks and other
recreation facilities.
candidate or a product on some type of scale, or they may ask for a ranking of
various alternatives.
The manner in which a question is asked can greatly affect the results of a survey.
For example, a recent NBC/Wall Street Journal poll asked two very similar questions
with very different results: (1) Do you favor cutting programs such as social security,
Medicare, Medicaid, and farm subsidies to reduce the budget deficit? The results:
23% favor; 66% oppose; 11% no opinion. (2) Do you favor cutting government
entitlements to reduce the budget deficit? The results: 61% favor; 25% oppose; 14%
no opinion.
The questionnaire may be very brief -- a few questions, taking five minutes or less --
or it can be quite long -- requiring an hour or more of the respondent's time. Since
it is inefficient to identify and approach a large national sample for only a few items
of information, there are "omnibus" surveys that combine the interests of several
clients into a single interview. In these surveys, respondents will be asked a dozen
questions on one subject, a half dozen more on another subject, and so on.
Because changes in attitudes or behavior cannot be reliably ascertained from a
single interview, some surveys employ a "panel design," in which the same
respondents are interviewed on two or more occasions. Such surveys are often
used during an election campaign or to chart a family's health or purchasing
pattern over a period of time.
here. One point of information that might be of interest is that the clever acronym,
SLOPS was coined by Norman Bradburn who used to head up NORC.
OR
Selecting a sample of households for a telephone interview is easier than that for an
in-person interview. The telephone survey is generally less expensive and simpler
to carry out. Its one main drawback is that only about 95 percent of all households
have telephones. Therefore, some people will be missed. Persons without
telephones generally have much lower incomes than those in households with
telephones-so telephone surveys do not adequately re p resent the low-income
population. Sampling from a frame of all possible telephone numbers, including
unlisted ones, is called random digit dialing (RDD). This may seem relatively easy
today but "weeding out" non-residential telephone numbers can be difficult.
Nonetheless, several ingenious methods have been developed to enable RDD
samples to be picked in an efficient way.
is essential that the respondent not be forced to report events that may have
happened too long ago to be remembered accurately.
Other elements to pretest during the planning phase include...whether any of the
questions are too sensitive...whether they unduly invade the respondent's
privacy...or whether they are too difficult even for a willing respondent to answer.
Each of these concerns has an important bearing on the overall statistical validity of
the survey results.
Deciding on the right respondent in a household sample is a key element in
"assuring" quality. For surveys where the inquiry is basically factual in nature, any
knowledgeable person may be asked to supply the needed information. This
procedure is used in the Current Population Survey (CPS), where any responsible
adult in a household is expected to be able to provide accurate answers to
employment or unemployment questions.
In other surveys, a so-called "household" respondent may produce erroneous or
even invalid information -for example, when the information is known only by a
specific individual and no one else.
A different, but related, issue arises in "attitude" surveys. It is generally accepted
that a randomly chosen respondent produces a more valid cross-section of opinion
than does a nonrandomly selected household respondent. This is because a
nonrandomly selected individual, acting as a household respondent, is more likely
to be someone who is at home, so the working public and their attitudes would be
underrepresented.
One final point: for a quality product, checks must be made at every step to ensure
that the sample is selected according to specifications; that the interviewers do
their work properly; that the information from the questionnaires is coded
accurately; that computer data entry is done correctly; and that the computer
programs used for data analysis work properly.
How to Schedule
How much time should be allotted for a survey? This varies with the type of survey
and the particular situation. Sometimes a survey can be done in two or three
weeks-if it involves a brief questionnaire and if the data are to be collected by
telephone from a list already available. More commonly, a survey of 1,000
individuals or more could take anywhere from a few months to one year- from
initial planning to having results ready for analysis.
The steps in a survey are not necessarily sequential; many of them can be
overlapped. Some, such as listing and sampling housing units in the areas to be
covered, can be carried out while a questionnaire is being put into final form.
Although they are not additive, all of these steps are time consuming. Perhaps the
most common planning error is to underestimate the time needed by making a
global estimate, without considering these individual stages.
How to Budget
A checklist of budget factors, such as this partial one, may be useful in estimating
total survey costs (whether in time or money). A "traditional" (paper and pencil) in-
person interview survey will be used to illustrate the budget steps. Many of these
• Staff time for planning the study and steering it through the various stages,
including time spent with the sponsor in refining data needs
• Sample selection costs, including central office staff labor and computing
costs
• For "area segments" samples, substantial field staff (interviewer) labor costs
and travel expenses for listing sample units within the segments
• Labor and material costs for pretesting the questionnaire and field
procedures; the pretesting step may need to be done more than once and
money and time should be set aside for this (especially when studying
something new)
• Supervisory costs for interviewer hiring, training, and monitoring
• Interviewer labor costs and travel expenses (including meals and lodging, if
out of town)
• Labor and expense costs of redoing a certain percentage of the interviews
(as a quality assurance step) and for follow-up on non-respondents
• Labor and material costs for getting the information from the questionnaire
onto a computer file
• Cost of spot-checking the quality of the process of computerizing the paper
questionnaires
• Cost of "cleaning" the final data-that is, checking the computer files for
inconsistent or impossible answers; this may also include the costs of "filling
in" or imputing any missing information
• Analyst costs for preparing tabulations and special analyses of the data;
computer time for the various tabulations and analyses
• Labor time and material costs for substantive analyses of the data and report
preparation
• Potentially important are incidental telephone charges, postage,
reproduction and printing costs for all stages of the survey- from planning
activities to the distribution of results
A good survey does not come "cheap," although some are more economical than
others.
As a rule, surveys made by an in-person interviewer are more expensive than those
made by mail or by telephone. Costs will increase with the complexity of the
questionnaire and the amount of data analysis to be carried out.
Surveys that involve a large number of interviews tend to be cheaper on a per-
interview basis than surveys with fewer interviews. This is particularly so when the
sample size is less than 1,000 respondents, because "tooling up" is involved for just
about any survey-except one that is to be repeated on the same group.
of the American Society for Quality are also worth looking for and can be searched
for on the Internet. Software tools like MS Project are also useful in making planning
more systematic and in increasing the efficiency of lessons learned, as Juran calls
them from one survey to the next.
Survey data can be collected, as we have seen, in several modes: In person, by mail,
telephone or through the Internet. Currently, mail surveys are the most common
example of self reported data collection. One reason is that these surveys can be
relatively low in cost. This does not mean, however, they are necessarily easy to
carry out. Planning the questionnaires for mail surveys is often more difficult than
for surveys that use interviewers. For example, care is needed to anticipate issues
that respondents may have and to deal with them ahead of time.
Using the mail can be particularly effective in business surveys-such as those
conducted by the U.S. Bureau of the Census or the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics.
Mail surveys also work well when they are directed toward specific groups- such as,
subscribers to a specialized magazine or members of a professional organization.
The manner in which self-reported data are obtained has begun to move away
from the traditional mail-out/mail-back approach. The use of fax machines-and now
the Internet-is on the rise. Fax numbers and Internet addresses are being added to
specialized membership and other lists. As a by-product, they can be used, along
with more conventional items like names and mailing addresses, in building
potential sampling frames.
There are still other methods of obtaining self-reported data. For example, the U. S.
Bureau of Labor Statistics has a panel of business establishments, in which the
respondents supply monthly data via touch-tone telephone entries that are directly
connected to the agency's computers.
For the immediate future, this type of automation will probably be restricted largely
to business or institutional surveys in which the same information is collected at
periodic intervals- monthly, quarterly, etc.
As computers and telecommunications become more widespread, touch-tone
applications or those involving respondents' computers "talking" directly to the
survey organizations' computers will increase significantly. This increase is already
well underway in health surveys, where samples of patient records are often
supplied electronically.
What Is CATI
The use of computers in survey interviewing is becoming quite common. In the
United States, most of the large-scale telephone surveys are now conducted via
CATI (Computer-Assisted Telephone Interviews). With CATI, the interviewers use a
computer terminal. The questions to be asked appear on the computer screen, and
the interviewers use the keyboard to directly enter the respondents' replies as they
are given.
CATI's important advantages are in quality and speed, not in cost savings. CATI can
cost more for small, non-repeated surveys, due to programming the questionnaire.
CATI's cost per interview decreases as sample size increases- so in large and/or
repeated surveys, it is cost competitive with conventional telephone methods.
The CATI interviewer's screen is programmed to show questions in a planned order,
so that interviewers cannot inadvertently omit questions or ask them out of
sequence. For example, the answers to some questions require "branching" (i.e.,
answers to prior questions determine which other questions are asked). CATI can be
programmed to do the correct branching automatically. In non-computer-assisted
telephone interviewing, incorrect branching has sometimes been an important
source of errors, especially omissions.
In the CATI setting, the computer can be programmed to edit replies. The computer
can check whether the reply to a particular question is consistent with other
information reported. If the editing indicates that a problem may exist, the
respondents are asked to confirm or correct earlier answers.
CATI can produce statistical results quicker than traditional methods of data
collection. For example, it eliminates the need for a separate computer data-entry
step. Furthermore, with CATI, some organizations are able to provide summaries of
results as each questionnaire is completed or at the end of each day.
data presentation to address the concerns outlined when the survey was initially
conceived.
The results of surveys are usually printed in publications and presented at staff
briefings or in more formal settings. Additional analyses can also be done by
making unidentifiable computer data files available to other researchers at a
nominal cost.
Shortcuts to Avoid
Conducting a credible survey entails scores of activities, each of which must be
carefully planned and controlled. Taking shortcuts can invalidate the results and
badly mislead the sponsor and other users. Here are three shortcuts to avoid, that
crop up often:
A pretest of the questionnaire and field procedures is the only way of finding out if
everything "works"- especially if a survey employs new techniques or a new set of
questions. Because it is rarely possible to foresee all the potential
misunderstandings or biasing effects of different questions and procedures, it is
vital for a well-designed survey operation to include provision for a pretest. There
should usually be a series of small-scale pilot studies to test the feasibility of the
individual techniques (if new) or to perfect the questionnaire concepts and
wording.
This should be followed by a full-scale "dress rehearsal" to find out if everything
connects together as intended.
Failure to follow up non-respondents can ruin an otherwise well-designed survey. It
is not uncommon for the initial response rate in many surveys to be under 50
percent.
To deal with this possibility, survey plans should include returning to sample
households where no one was home (perhaps at a different time or on a weekend),
attempting to persuade persons who are inclined to refuse, and so on. In the case
of mail surveys, it is usually necessary to conduct several follow-up mailings-spaced,
possibly, about three weeks apart. There is some evidence that responses to
subsequent mailings may differ from responses to the first mailing. Thus, biases can
result without the extra effort of follow-ups. Depending on the circumstances, it
may even be necessary to contact a sub sample of the remaining non-respondents
by telephone or personal visit.
A low response rate does more damage in rendering a survey's results questionable
than a small sample, because there may be no valid way of scientifically inferring
the characteristics of the population represented by the non-respondents.
Sloppy execution of a survey in the field can seriously damage results.
Controlling the quality of the fieldwork is done in several ways, most often through
observation or redoing a small sample of interviews by supervisory or senior
personnel. There should be at least some questionnaire-by-questionnaire checking,
while the survey is being carried out; this is essential if omissions or other obvious
mistakes in the data are to be uncovered before it is too late to fix them.
In other words, to assure that the proper execution of a survey corresponds to its
design, every facet of a survey must be looked at during implementation. For
example... re-examining the sample selection … re-do some of the interviews...
assessing the editing and coding of the responses.
Without proper checking, errors may go undetected. With good procedures, on the
other hand, they might even have been prevented. Insisting on high standards in
recruiting and training of interviewers is crucial to conducting a quality survey.
Just looking at each step by itself is still not enough. As W. Edwards Deming
recommends, a complete systems approach should be developed to be sure each
step fits into the previous and subsequent steps. Murphy's Law applies here, as
elsewhere in life. The corollary to keep in mind is that not only is it true that "If
anything can go wrong it will… but, "If you didn't check on it, it did."
One of the most famous examples of a poorly conceived survey is the 1948 poll that
predicted Harry Truman would lose the presidential election to Thomas Dewey. The
survey's main flaw was its sample, which failed to fairly represent all segments of
the American electorate-particularly those who eventually voted for Truman.
To the extent resources will allow, all three types of remedies are at least
considered in planning the best surveys.
Three examples of real surveys will help to illustrate how the types of remedies are
used to deal with some common survey problems:
1. A state-wide mail survey of high school football coaches to profile the use of
athletic trainers for varsity football teams
2. A county-wide telephone interview survey to poll adults' views on an
upcoming school bond referendum
3. A national in-person Interview survey to find out how often, on average,
people visited a doctor in the last year.
Some Remedies
Increase the sample size, particularly for the most important and heterogeneous
segments of the population.
Choose a stratified sample. This might be done in the mail survey by selecting
separate samples for a number of school categories defined by student enrollment.
This stratified sampling of schools by size would improve findings for the state, if
those in larger schools are different (e.g., more likely to hire trainers) than those in
smaller schools.
• Findings that Disregard the Sample Design-The plan for selecting football
coaches in the mail survey might call for those at private schools to be
sampled at a relatively higher rate to assure that the number of respondents
from this type of school is large enough. Failure to account for the relative
oversupply of private schools in the sample during data analysis would
cause a biased underestimate in the projected percentage of the state's high
school football teams that have a trainer, if private schools are less likely to
have them.
A Remedy
Give survey data from private schools relatively less influence in shaping the final
results projected for the state.
Some Remedies
Figure out the percentage of adults in the county who have no access to a telephone.
Adjust the findings to try to account for any sample imbalance.
Some Remedies
Offer cash or some other valued reward for participating in the survey.
Adjust the findings to account for sample imbalance.
Send reminders or make follow-up telephone calls to those who do not respond
after the first mailing.
Some Remedies
The following remedies, and the first two for mail surveys, can be used for both
nonresponse in telephone and in-person surveys.
Develop a plan to be uniformly applied in calling each member of the sample,
requiring that calls be made at various times when coaches are available.
• Questionnaire content
• How well the respondent answers the survey questions
• (In interview surveys) How appropriately the interviewer asks the survey
questions.
Some Remedies
Encourage respondents to use personal schedules, insurance records, and other
sources to help them remember.
If possible, shorten the length of the period for which doctor visits are to be counted
(e.g., to the last two weeks rather than the last calendar year).
A Remedy
Ask the question more objectively (e.g., by using: "Do you favor or oppose the school
bond referendum?").
Some Remedies
Try out the question on a small but broad cross-section of likely respondents before
interviewing starts.
Find out what is confusing about the phrase, and then clarify the interviewer or
respondent instructions as needed.
Check the interviewer carefully throughout the data-collection phase (especially
early on), to make sure that definitions of these terms are correctly interpreted for
respondents.
Qualitative data derived from focus groups are extremely valuable when vivid and
rich descriptions are needed.
In fact, focus groups are an increasingly popular way to learn about opinions and
attitudes. According to the late political consultant Lee Atwater, the conversations
in focus groups "give you a sense of what makes people tick and a sense of what is
going on with people's minds and lives that you simply can't get with survey data."
Focus groups are not polls but in-depth, qualitative interviews with a small number
of carefully selected people brought together to discuss a host of topics ranging
from pizza to safe sex.
Unlike the one-way flow of information in a one-on-one interview, focus groups
generate data through the give and take of group discussion. Listening as people
share and compare their different points of view provides a wealth of information-
not just about what they think, but why they think the way they do.
• Political pollsters use focus groups to ask potential voters about their views
of political candidates or issues
• Organizational researchers use focus groups to learn how employees and
managers feel about the issues confronting them in the workplace.
• Marketing firms use focus groups to determine how customers respond to
new products.
• Public agencies find focus groups an important tool in improving customer
service.
• Survey designers use focus groups to pretest their ideas and to interpret the
quantitative information obtained from interviewing.
One caution-remember that with a focus group, it is not possible to compare the
results from different groups in a strict quantitative sense, because they lack
representativeness. Each group may be characterized as augmenting the
information of the others, in an effort to look for as many different explanations or
interpretations as possible.
questions about what they hear, and generally reacting to each other. It is a totally
different dynamic from an interview.
are complete, the moderator guides the discussion, using an outline of questions,
to explore various aspects of the research topic. As the group responds to each
question, the moderator can probe for more information and ask follow-up
questions to elicit more discussion.
Focus-group sessions are frequently scheduled to last two hours, with the
discussion taking 90 minutes. Once all of the questions have been asked, the
moderator may conclude by giving a summary of the major points in the discussion
and asking the group for feedback. Or, the moderator may have each participant
think back over what was discussed and then have each one choose what he or she
felt was the most important point. Another good way of concluding is to ask
participants if there are any questions about a particular topic that were not asked
but should have been.
The best information can often be gathered by using the focus groups and surveys
together. Surveys can provide precise quantitative information; focus groups can
provide qualitative data that penetrates more deeply.
A focus group analysis is truly qualitative. You use the actual words and behaviors
of the participants to answer your questions, rather than counting response
options.
6. Designing a Questionnaire
In survey taking it is clear that special training and expertise are required to draw
the sample, or to create any necessary computer programs. But what about writing
the questions for the survey questionnaire? We've all been asking questions and
obtaining answers from those around us throughout our lives. Aren't we already
"question-asking experts"? May be, Maybe not!
Where to Start
The place to start in designing a questionnaire is with your data collection goals-
What information do you need and from whom? Once these objectives have been
clearly identified, the next step is to decide what pieces of specific information are
needed to satisfy these objectives.
Many experienced questionnaire designers actually draft an outline of the final
report, detailing how they will answer their fundamental data analysis concerns.
This pinpoints exactly which pieces of information will be required and leads to the
construction of a "data analysis plan"-which connects every data collection
objective to each of the specific questions and how they should be asked. For
example, consider answering an inquiry, such as How do people differ in their
eating habits?
Visualize a questionnaire that captures:
It may also be good to have a question in which people use their own words to
describe their eating habits. Sometimes this approach can reveal whether the other
questions were really understood.
The data analysis plan may be quite informal- a table or flowchart linking
everything together at a high level. Whatever the formality, each broad goal should
be clearly set and linked to each of the specific questions on the questionnaire as
they are constructed.
The use of an analysis plan at this early stage may seem extravagant; however, it is
one of the easiest ways, if kept updated, to ensure that the questionnaire contains
everything that is needed and nothing extraneous.
The larger and more complex the inquiry, the more emphasis should be placed on
an analysis plan. Otherwise, it becomes virtually impossible to keep all of the details
in mind through the constant revisions a questionnaire undergoes. No one wants
to come to the end of a $50,000 (or $500,000) survey project and discover that a
critical variable was missing or was collected in the wrong way.
Question Context
As the survey team approaches the point of constructing specific questions, they
must decide whether the questionnaire will be self-administered or interviewer-
administered. The team also must decide how to deliver the questionnaire-by mail
• food and drink actually consumed within the past 24 hours, whether typical
or not
• most frequently consumed food items during a certain time period, such as
last month
• food and beverages preferred when one is given a choice
• typical patterns of consumption, even if these patterns may not currently be
in place.
We also have to decide whether the information is to reflect the patterns of food
and beverage consumption for the individual respondent or whether we want the
respondent to report for the entire household. These decisions should take into
consideration what needs to be included in the final report. The essential task is to
convey the same information to all respondents about what is wanted. Questions
can be formatted for open-ended or close-ended responses.
For example:
"How many cups of coffee did you drink yesterday?"
overly delay the data collection or raise the chance of the interview breaking off before
completion).
If precision needs are not conveyed clearly to all respondents, one person may
choose to estimate within very broad ranges and another may make an effort to
closely count the episodes or behaviors. The result would be that these various
respondents would be answering different questions and their data would not be
comparable. Remember, respondents are not mind readers; they cannot be
expected to guess what is desired by the researcher or questionnaire designer.
Many concepts we ask people to report on in surveys do not have universally
agreed-upon definitions. Surprisingly, there is little social consensus about the
definitions of some commonplace everyday terms. Straightforward words, such as
job, work, or income, can have many nuances and different meanings for different
people.
There are many things that may make a question difficult to answer and should be
avoided. For instance,
Pretesting such questions will quickly reveal the problem. Likewise, questions that
ask for sensitive or self-incriminating information (e.g., on illegal drug use or cheating
on taxes) are ones respondents may not want to answer. For the most sensitive
types of information, questionnaires may need to be self administered with an
unbreakable guarantee of respondent anonymity.
Use extra caution when developing new questions-a great deal of preliminary effort
is needed. Questionnaire designers budget a good deal of time for this.
The questions need to flow well from one to the next, and designers should be
aware that earlier questions provide information and context to the respondents
that they may use in later answers. Often the answer to one question may influence
the answer to a later question. For instance, suppose respondents are asked first
How do you feel about your job? and later on How do you feel about life in general?
Answers to the second question may be tempered by the first question. Because
respondents have already reported their feelings about their job, including those
feelings in the second answer may be redundant. On the other hand, if their job is
very important to them (or salient for some other reason), then the answer to the
first question may be used when constructing the second answer. These so-called
"order effects" are difficult to predict and often become apparent only through field
tests of the questionnaire, in which different orderings of the questions are
compared.
Types of Pretesting
Pretesting techniques are divided into two major categories-pre-field and field. Pre-
field techniques are generally used during the preliminary stages of questionnaire
development. They include respondent focus groups and cognitive laboratory
interviews.
Six field techniques that test questionnaires under operational conditions are also
covered. These include behavior coding of interviewer/respondent interactions,
interviewer debriefings, respondent debriefings, split-sample tests, and the analysis
of item nonresponse rates and response distributions.
1. Respondent Focus Groups
Focus groups-a form of in-depth group interviewing- are conducted early in the
questionnaire development cycle and can be used in a variety of ways to assess the
question-answering process.
Such groups may gather information about a topic before questionnaire
construction begins (for example, to learn how people structure their thoughts about a
topic, their understanding of general concepts or specific terminology, or their opinions
about the sensitivity or difficulty of the questions).
Focus groups help identify variations in language, terminology, or interpretation of
questions and response options. Self-administered questionnaires can be pretested
in a focus group, to learn about the appearance and formatting of the
questionnaire. In addition, knowledge of content problems is gained.
One of the main advantages of focus groups is the opportunity to observe a great
deal of interaction on a topic in a limited period of time.
They also produce information and insights that may be less accessible without the
give and take found in a group. Because of their interactive nature, however, focus
groups do not permit a good test of the "normal" interviewing process. Researchers
also do not have as much control over the process as with other pretesting
methods. (For example, one or two people in the group may dominate the discussion
and restrict input from other focus group members.)
2. Cognitive Laboratory Interviews
Cognitive laboratory interviews are also generally used early in the questionnaire
development cycle. They consist of one-on-one interviews using a structured
questionnaire in which respondents describe their thoughts while answering the
survey questions. "Think aloud" interviews, as this technique is called, can be
conducted either concurrently or retrospectively (i.e. the respondents' verbalizations
of their thought processes can occur either during or after the completion of the
questionnaire).
Laboratory interviews provide an important means of finding out directly from
respondents what their problems are with the questionnaire. In addition, small
numbers of interviews (as few as 15) can yield information about major problems-
such as respondents repeatedly identifying the same questions and concepts as
sources of confusion. Because sample sizes are not large, repeated pretesting of an
instrument is often possible.
After one round of lab interviews is completed, researchers can diagnose problems,
revise question wording to resolve these problems, and conduct additional
interviews to see if the new questions are better.
Cognitive interviews can incorporate follow-up questions by the interviewer-in
addition to respondents' statements of their thoughts. Different types of follow-up
questions are used. Probing questions are used when the researcher wants to focus
the respondent on particular aspects of the question-response task. (For example,
the interviewer may ask how respondents chose their answers, how they
interpreted reference periods, or what they thought a particular term meant.)
Paraphrasing (i.e., asking the respondents to repeat the question in their own words)
permits the researcher to learn whether the respondent understands the question
and interprets it in the manner intended. It may also reveal better wordings for
questions.
3. Behavior Coding
Behavior coding of respondent-interviewer interactions involves systematic coding
of the interaction between interviewers and respondents from live or taped
interviews.
The emphasis is on specific aspects of how the interviewer asked the question and
how the respondent reacted. When used for questionnaire assessment, the coding
highlights interviewer or respondent behaviors indicative of a problem with the
question, the response categories, or the respondent's ability to form an adequate
response. For example, if a respondent asks for clarification after hearing the question,
it is likely that some aspect of the question caused confusion. Likewise, if a respondent
interrupts before the interviewer finishes reading the question, then the
respondent may miss information that might be important to giving a correct
answer.
In contrast to pre-field techniques, behavior coding requires a sample size sufficient
to address analytic requirements. For example, if the questionnaire contains many
skip patterns, it is necessary to select a large enough sample to permit observation of
various movements through the questionnaire. The determining sample sizes for
behavior coding should take into account the relevant population groups for which
separate analyses are desired.
The value of behavior coding is that it allows systematic detection of questions that
have large numbers of behaviors that reflect problems. It is not usually designed to
provide answers about the source of the problems. It also may not distinguish
which of several similar versions of a question is better.
4. Respondent Debriefings
Respondent debriefings involve incorporating structured follow-up questions at
the end of a field test interview to elicit quantitative and qualitative information
about respondents' interpretations of survey questions. For pretesting purposes,
the primary objective is to determine whether concepts and questions are
understood by respondents in the same way that the survey sponsors intended.
Respondent debriefings can also be used to evaluate other aspects of respondents'
tasks, such as their use of records to answer survey questions or their
understanding of the purpose of the interview. In addition, respondent debriefings
can be useful in determining the reason for respondent misunderstandings.
Sometimes results of respondent debriefings show a question is superfluous and
can be eliminated. Alternatively, additional questions may need to be included in
the final questionnaire. Finally, the debriefings may show that concepts or
questions cause confusion or misunderstanding as far as the intended meaning is
concerned. Some survey goals may need to be greatly modified or even dropped.
A critical aspect of a successful respondent debriefing is that question designers
and researchers must have a clear idea of potential problems so that good
debriefing questions can be developed. Ideas about potential problems can come
from pre-field techniques conducted prior to the field test, from analysis of data
from a previous survey, from careful review of questionnaires, or from observation
of actual interviews.
Respondent debriefings have the potential to supplement information obtained
from behavior coding. As previously discussed, behavior coding can demonstrate
the existence of problems but does not always indicate the source of the problem.
When designed properly, the results of respondent debriefings can provide
information about the problem sources and may reveal problems not evident from
the response behavior.
5. Interviewer Debriefings
Interviewer debriefings traditionally have been the primary method to evaluate
field tests. The interviewers who conduct the survey field tests are queried to use
their direct contact with respondents to enrich the questionnaire designer's
understanding of questionnaire problems.
Although important, interviewer debriefings are not adequate as the sole
evaluation method. Interviewers may not always be accurate reporters of certain
types of questionnaire problems for several reasons:
6. Split-Panel Tests
Split-panel tests refer to controlled experimental testing among questionnaire
variants or interviewing modes to determine which is "better" or to measure
differences between them. For pretesting multiple versions of a questionnaire there
needs to be a previously determined standard by which to judge the differences.
Split-panel tests are also used to calibrate the effect of changing questions-
particularly important in the redesign and testing of surveys where the
comparability of the data collected over time is an issue.
Split-panel tests can incorporate changes in a single question, a set of questions, or
an entire questionnaire. It is important to provide for adequate sample sizes in a
split-panel test so that differences of substantive interest can be measured well. It is
also imperative that these tests involve the use of randomized assignment so
differences can be attributed to the question or questionnaire, and not to
something else.
7. Analysis of Item Nonresponse Rates
Analysis of item nonresponse rates from the data collected during a field test
(involving one or multiple panels) can provide useful information about how well
the questionnaire works. This can be done by looking at how often items are
missing (item nonresponse rates).
These rates can be informative in two ways:
• "Don't know" rates can determine how difficult a task is for respondents to
do.
• Refusal rates can determine how often respondents find certain questions or
versions of a question too sensitive to be answered.
Combining Methods
Both pre-field and field testing should be done when time and funds permit; but,
there are some situations in which it is not feasible to use all methods. Still, it is
particularly desirable to meld the objective with the subjective methods- the
respondent centered with the interviewer-centered. This complementarity allows
for both good problem identification and problem resolution and provides an
evaluation of broad scope.
So, how could I possibly run a survey? My budget is tight. I have no staff and limited
facilities. It's 10 degrees below 0 outside, and I'm not going to stand on a corner
intercepting angry commuters all day. The thought of sitting on the phone
repeating, "Do you strongly agree, agree, neither agree nor disagree, disagree, or
strongly disagree" to two hundred people is not exactly glamorous either. Are the
prospects of conducting a survey completely impossible?
Certainly not. Mail surveys are a powerful, effective, and efficient alternative to their
more expensive relatives- the telephone survey and the personal interview. A
quality, medium-scale mail survey can be conducted with minimal cost, little staff,
and no complex equipment. And a well-conducted mail survey can be just as
effective and meaningful as other more resource-intensive surveys.
Our nation's postal workers don't need to tell you about the volume of mail that
ends up in your mailbox each day. Encouraging participation in mail surveys is not
a simple task under these circumstances. A survey that is lost in a sea of magazines,
bills, and personal, business, and advertising mail may never be found.
Although there are some drawbacks to mail surveys, it is possible to obtain valid
results with the right kind of questionnaire and distribution technique. Well-
prepared surveys can be executed successfully when the conditions are right. This
pamphlet provides an overview of some of the strengths and weaknesses of mail
surveys, a basic understanding of what is needed to conduct a successful mail
survey, and ways to determine if this type of survey is appropriate for your
situation.
Geographical Stratification
Mail surveys also enable specific segments of the population to be easily targeted.
For example, if you are surveying a city on the newest location for a garbage dump,
you can compare the different areas of the town and the reaction to the garbage
dump through mail surveys directed at certain neighborhoods.
Honesty
Finally, some studies show that people provide more honest answers to mail
surveys than they do to other interviewing methods. Privacy-especially if your
survey is about a delicate issue-may be important to the respondent, and mail
surveys may increase the credibility of the answers.
The bottom line is, that given enough time, you may want to use a mail survey,
especially if you are subject to severe money constraints. But in doing so, you must
also be aware of their disadvantages.
Wording of Questions
Another area of critical importance to mail surveys is questionnaire design-poorly
worded questions are a survey breaker. Questions must be simple, short, and
precise. Unlike telephone and face-to-face interviews, there is no opportunity for
explanation or follow-up questions like "Do you have something specific in mind?"
Questions left open to interpretation will produce unusable results.
Other Concerns
Other factors can be of particular concern in mail surveys. For example, did you ask
questions that are too personal? Is the questionnaire too long? Is the questionnaire
legible and easy to follow? Can the person to be surveyed read? If, for instance, you
are conducting a survey in a southern border town in Texas and neglect to include
a copy of the questionnaire in both Spanish and English, the chances for success
are greatly reduced.
The disadvantages of mail surveys leave room for large errors. But many of these
errors can be reduced significantly with overall awareness, good planning, careful
wording of questions, thorough preparation, and pretesting.
Yes No
Yes No
IF YES,
• Pitfall #1: "I can use the white pages in the city phone book to draw my sample
of people who live here."
Always examine a list before assuming that it answers all of your problems. In this
example, a telephone book may seem to be comprehensive, but it contains many
natural flaws. Poorer families may not be able to afford their own telephone.
Wealthier or larger families may have multiple phone lines and, therefore, multiple
phone book listings. Certain professionals tend to have unlisted phone numbers
and would be excluded from the list outright. A phone book may also be more out
of date than other available lists due to deaths and families that moved. Examine
your list for inherent biases, check and recheck its accuracy, and look for ways to
make any list more complete and more comprehensive.
• Pitfall #2: "I don't have the money to spend on these fancy booklets. Just stick
the photocopy in an envelope and send it off. That way we can spend more
money on the analysis."
A bad-looking mail survey will guarantee a poor response rate. With the high
volume of mail that flows into the average American home on a daily basis, your
survey must be professional and eye-catching in appearance; otherwise, it could
simply end up in the trash unread. Investing in an attractive survey will save you
money in the long run by delivering a high initial response rate and increasing your
chances for accurate and meaningful results.
• Pitfall #3: "I'll just send out this stack of surveys, and when they all come back,
we'll tally the results."
Simply sending out a straight mail survey may result in a return rate so small that
the results are meaningless. The key to success is follow-up. A reminder postcard, a
return incentive, a second copy of the survey sent to anyone who didn't return the
first copy, or a follow-up note outlining the value of the completed survey to the
recipient-these seemingly small follow-up steps can significantly increase the
percentage of surveys which eventually return to you. Preparatory steps, such as
teaser postcards alerting the recipient that the survey is en route, also increase
response.
Overall Summary
These guidelines will help you achieve very good response rates from your mail
survey- perhaps even better than the results you could obtain by telephone. The
key is to show you care about getting a response- personalized surveys that include
incentives, sent by First-Class Mail or Priority Mail, and with several follow-ups, send
that message to the respondent far better than a one-time, photocopied, bulk
mailing with no return envelope.
The interviewer explains that your household was carefully selected and that
obtaining information from you is important to the success of the survey. How
would you respond?
Certainly, many questions are raised by calls like this, including the following:
So how did the interviewer get your number? And why did the interviewer say it
was so important that your household be in the survey? If you have been reading
the other chapters in this What Is a Survey booklet you know the answer to the
second question, but what about the first?
Telephone Households
Generally, it is estimated that 96 percent, or even more, of all U.S. households have
at least one telephone. For many topics studied in market research or opinion
polling the differences between telephone and non-telephone households are
relatively small.
When exactly are telephone households "representative" of all households?
Households without a telephone are more common in the South, in rural areas, and
on Indian reservations. Somewhat more often they have African-American
members, low incomes, and either only one person or six or more persons. Children
under age 14 and unemployed adults are also slightly more likely to live in
households without telephones.
If the survey topic is related to these characteristics, omitting households without
telephones will lead to a bias in the survey results. An example where this bias
could be important is in studying crime victimization.
The decision to use a survey of telephone households to obtain data on a specific
topic is not based entirely on the expected level of bias or error that may occur
when non-telephone households are not included in the sample. The cost,
timeliness, and overall quality of findings are also major considerations.
Telephone surveys are timelier and less expensive than those done face to face.
Interviewer effects can be better controlled in telephone surveying. Self-
administered mail surveys are less costly to conduct than telephone surveys but
generally take more calendar time. See the chapter, More About Mail Surveys, for
additional comparisons.
of telephone numbers (a 3-digit area code, a 3-digit prefix, and a 4-digit suffix).
Lately there have been many changes, such as the increase in area codes from
splitting existing ones. Until recently, area codes have not crossed state lines. The
introduction of number portability across geographic areas is causing some
disruption to this system. For the most part, knowing the area code for a number
still tells you in what state the number is located and sometimes in what part of the
state.
Prefixes are assigned within area codes to an "exchange." Exchanges are
geographic areas set by public service commissions within each state. Exchange
boundaries seldom correspond to political boundaries.
Metropolitan areas usually have more than one prefix, rural exchanges often just
one. Rural exchanges are typically the same size geographically as urban
exchanges, even though they have much smaller populations and lower service
needs. A single prefix of 10,000 numbers is more than adequate to meet rural
requirements. For most such exchanges only a small share of the 10,000 available
numbers are being used for residential or commercial service.
Because most of the geographic area of the United States is rural, most exchanges
have only a single prefix; on the average, those rural exchange prefixes have a very
low density of numbers currently in use.
Exactly how bad is this problem of "ring no answers"? If only a small percentage of
telephone numbers did not have tri-tones but were connected to ringing
recordings, the cost of screening would be low enough so that randomly generated
numbers could be used in a survey. Unfortunately, the presence of so many rural
exchanges with a single prefix, only partially used, leads to perhaps 75 to 80
percent of the randomly generated numbers being unusable-a rate that makes it
simply too expensive to randomly generate numbers and then just call them.
Clustering
If we could determine the location of working residential telephone numbers
within a given area code/prefix, telephone sampling would be straightforward.
Working residential numbers are known to be clustered, but the location of these
clusters is not known.
Calling a local telephone company would be time consuming and costly; moreover,
they usually will not give out this information.
A Clever Idea
A statistician then working for CBS News, Warren Mitofsky, developed a method
based on the clustering of telephone numbers. His method greatly improved
telephone surveying, making it economically feasible on a large scale. The
approach was two-phased. In phase one, he generated a relatively small sample of
completely random telephone numbers by appending random 4-digit suffixes to
known area code/prefix combinations and had interviewers call those numbers.
Only 25 percent turned out to be working residential numbers.
In phase two, he had interviewers call additional numbers "close" to those that
turned out to be working residential. He defined "close" to be numbers that were in
the same "100-bank"-a set of numbers that have the same first two digits of the
suffix. For example, suppose that the randomly generated telephone number 734-
555-6789 was a working residential telephone number. Mitofsky would have
interviewers dial other numbers selected at random in the sequence from 734-555-
6700 to 734-555-6799. When he did this, 65 percent of the numbers dialed within
those 100-banks were working residential-a big improvement over the 25 percent
working residential in the first stage of the sampling. This two-stage design greatly
increases the "hit rate" of working residential numbers in the second stage and
considerably improves the efficiency of telephone sampling operations.
Mitofsky was unsure of some of the statistical properties of his approach, so he
asked a colleague at Westat, Joseph Waksberg, to optimize it. Waksberg found
several useful properties of the design. The design became known as the two-stage
Mitofsky-Waksberg method.
Their method rapidly became standard for selecting telephone samples of
households (and, in a few instances, even of business firms). It was inexpensive to
obtain a list of all area codes and prefixes, generate numbers randomly for the first
stage, and then call them to find out which were working and residential. In the
second stage, within a "working residential 100-bank,"the higher hit rate reduced
the amount of dialing that had to be done by interviewers.
to each sample number and sell "targeted" samples that would have higher
proportions of households with specific characteristics. For example, a researcher
may want a sample that would have a higher yield of households with annual
incomes above a certain level. Telephone samples based on income information
linked to the bank, or prefix, for the number are readily available.
The Future
The telephone system continues to change as new services and, with deregulation,
new providers enter the market. Consider three challenges:
Cell Phones
Currently, there are nearly 70 million cell-phone subscribers in the United States.
Most can still be contacted via a traditional (land line) telephone in a household.
Because of this, cell phone numbers can, and typically are now, excluded from
sampling to begin with since they are classified by NXX codes. Conceivably, cell-
phone subscribers may begin using their cell telephones for residential purposes,
requiring that samples of such numbers be taken. Therefore, households with both
traditional and cell phones would get a higher chance of being selected than
households without cell phones. To deal with this "overrepresentation," we could
correct the probabilities of selection, just as is now being done for households with
multiple line-telephone numbers.
When results of surveys are reported in the media, they often include a statement
like-
"55 percent of respondents favor Ms. Smith in the upcoming mayoral election.
There is a margin of error of 3 percentage points."
What does a statement like this mean? This pamphlet attempts to answer this
question and to provide some cautions on the use of the "margin of error" as the
sole measure of a survey's uncertainty.
Surveys are typically designed to provide an estimate of the true value of one or
more characteristics of a population at a given time. The target of a survey might be
An estimate from a survey is unlikely to exactly equal the true population quantity
of interest for a variety of reasons. For one thing, the questions maybe badly
worded. For another, some people who are supposed to be in the sample may not
be at home, or even if they are, they may refuse to participate or may not tell the
truth. These are sources of "nonsampling error."
But the estimate will probably still differ from the true value, even if all
nonsampling errors could be eliminated. This is because data in a survey are
collected from only some-but not all-members of the population to make data
collection cheaper or faster, usually both.
Suppose, in the mayoral election poll mentioned earlier, we sample 100 people
who intend to vote and that 55 support Ms. Smith while 45 support Mr. Jones. This
would seem to suggest that a majority of the town's voters, including people not
sampled but who will vote in the election, would support Ms. Smith.
Of course, just by chance, a majority in a particular sample might support Ms. Smith
even if the majority in the population supports Mr. Jones. Such an occurrence
might arise due to "sampling error," meaning that results in the sample differ from a
target population quantity, simply due to the "luck of the draw"-i.e., by which set of
100 people were chosen to be in the sample.
Does sampling error render surveys useless? Fortunately, the answer to this
question is "No." But how should we summarize the strength of the information in a
survey? That is a role for the margin of error.
Surveys are often conducted by starting out with a list (known as the "sampling
frame") of all units in the population and choosing a sample. In opinion polls, this
list often consists of all possible phone numbers in a certain geographic area (both
listed and unlisted numbers).
In a scientific survey every unit in the population has some known positive
probability of being selected for the sample, and the probability of any particular
sample being chosen can be calculated. The beauty of a probability sample is
twofold. Not only does it avoid biases that might arise if samples were selected
based on the whims of the interviewer, but it also provides a basis for estimating
the extent of sampling error. This latter property is what enables investigators to
calculate a "margin of error." To be precise, the laws of probability make it possible
for us to calculate intervals of the form estimate +/- margin of error.
Such intervals are sometimes called 95 percent confidence intervals and would be
expected to contain the true value of the target quantity (in the absence of
nonsampling errors) at least 95 percent of the time. An important factor in
determining the margin of error is the size of the sample. Larger samples are more
likely to yield results close to the target population quantity and thus have smaller
margins of error than more modest-sized samples.
In the case of the mayoral poll in which 55 of 100 sampled individuals support Ms.
Smith, the sample estimate would be that 55 percent support Ms. Smith-however,
there is a margin of error of 10 percent. There f o re, a 95 percent confidence
interval for the percentage supporting Ms. Smith would be (55%-10%) to
(55%+10%) or (45 percent, 65 percent), suggesting that in the broader community
the support for Ms. Smith could plausibly range from 45 percent to 65 percent. This
implies-because of the small sample size-considerable uncertainty about whether a
majority of townspeople actually support Ms. Smith.
Instead, if there had been a survey of 1,000 people, 550 of whom support Ms. Smith,
the sample estimate would again be 55 percent, but now the margin of error for
Ms. Smith's support would only be about 3 percent. A 95 percent confidence
interval for the proportion supporting Ms. Smith would thus be (55%-3%) to
(55%+3%) or (52 percent, 58 percent), which provides much greater assurance that
a majority of the town's voters support Ms. Smith.
Probability Sampling Designs-The survey researcher also has control over the
design of the sample, which can affect the margin of error. Three common types are
simple random sampling, random digit dialing, and stratified sampling.
error cannot usually be assessed from the sample itself, even if the sample is a
probability sample.
Some things that help assess nonsampling uncertainties, when available, include
the percentage of respondents who answer "don't know" or "undecided." Be wary
when these quantities are not given. Almost always there are people who have not
made up their mind. How these cases are handled can make a big difference.
Simply splitting them in proportion to the views of those who gave an opinion can
be misleading in some settings.
It is important to learn if the survey results are actually from a probability sample at
all. Many media surveys are based on what are called quota samples, and, although
margins of error are reported from them, they do not strictly apply.
Overall, nonresponse in surveys has been growing in recent years and is
increasingly a consideration in the interpretation of reported results. Media stories
typically do not provide the response rate, even though these can be well under 50
percent. When the results are important to you, always try to learn what the
nonresponse rate is and what has been done about it.