A COMPARISON OF NONRESPONSE IN MAIL, TELEPHONE, AND FACE-TO-FACE SURVEYS - APPLYING MULTILEVEL MODELING TO METAANALYSIS
A COMPARISON OF NONRESPONSE IN MAIL, TELEPHONE, AND FACE-TO-FACE SURVEYS - APPLYING MULTILEVEL MODELING TO METAANALYSIS
复制标题
DOI：
10.1007/bf01097014
复制
发表时间：
1994-11-01
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
DELEEUW, ED
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
HOX, JJ;DELEEUW, ED
这篇文章报道了一项对45项研究的荟萃分析，这些研究明确比较了通过邮件、电话或面对面调查获得的回答。数据分析采用了广义分层线性模型。抽样程序(例如，本地便利样本、随机一般样本)、主题的显著程度、研究机构(大学、政府还是市场研究)对回答有影响。平均而言，面对面调查的完成率最高(70.3%)，电话调查次之(67.2%)，邮寄调查最低(61.3%)。与出版年有显著的互动：在本分析所涉期间(1947至1992年)，对面对面和电话调查的答复下降，但对邮寄调查的答复略有上升。我们将这归因于大量关于邮件调查无回答问题的研究，并建议在这一方向上进行更多的研究和开发，用于面对面和电话调查。
This article reports a meta-analysis of 45 studies that explicitly compare the response obtained using a mail, telephone or face-to-face survey. The data analysis uses a generalized hierarchical linear model. Sampling procedure (e.g., local convenience sample, random general sample), saliency of topic, and research organization (university, government versus market research) had an effect on the response. On the average, the face-to-face condition achieved the highest completion rate (70.3%), the telephone survey the next highest (67.2%), and the mail survey the lowest (61.3%). There is a significant interaction with the year of publication: The response to face-to-face and telephone surveys is going down in the period covered by this analysis (1947 to 1992), but the response to mail surveys is going up slightly. We attribute this to the large amount of research on nonresponse problems with mail surveys, and recommend more research and development in this direction for face-to-face and telephone methods.