This section offers descriptions as well as discussions of data sources that are of interest to social scientists engaged in empirical research or teaching courses that include empirical investigations performed by students. The purpose is to describe the information in the data source, to give examples of questions tackled with the data and to tell how to access the data for research and teaching. We focus on data from German speaking countries that allow international comparative research. While most of the data are at the micro level (individuals, households, or firms), more aggregate data and meta data (for regions, industries, or nations) are included as well. Suggestions for data sources to be described in future columns (or comments on past columns) should be send to:
Numerous surveys link interview data to administrative records, conditional on respondent consent, in order to explore new and innovative research questions. Optimizing the linkage consent rate is a critical step toward realizing the scientific advantages of record linkage and minimizing the risk of linkage consent bias. Linkage consent rates have been shown to be particularly sensitive to certain design features, such as where the consent question is placed in the questionnaire and how the question is framed. However, the interaction of these design features and their relative contributions to the linkage consent rate have never been jointly studied, raising the practical question of which design feature (or combination of features) should be prioritized from a consent rate perspective. We address this knowledge gap by reporting the results of a placement and framing experiment embedded within separate telephone and Web surveys. We find a significant interaction between placement and framing of the linkage consent question on the consent rate. The effect of placement was larger than the effect of framing in both surveys, and the effect of framing was only evident in the Web survey when the consent question was placed at the end of the questionnaire. Both design features had negligible impact on linkage consent bias for a series of administrative variables available for consenters and non-consenters. We conclude this research note with guidance on the optimal administration of the linkage consent question.
AbstractPanel surveys are increasingly experimenting with the use of self-administered modes of data collection as alternatives to more expensive interviewer-administered modes. As data collection costs continue to rise, it is plausible that future panel surveys will forego interviewer administration entirely. We examine the implications of this scenario for recruitment bias in the first wave of a panel survey of employees in Germany. Using an experimental multi-mode design and detailed administrative record data available for the full sample, we investigate the magnitude of two sources of panel recruitment bias: nonresponse and panel consent (i.e., consent to follow-up interview). Across 29 administrative estimates, we find relative measures of aggregate nonresponse bias to be comparable between face-to-face and self-administered (mail/Web) recruitment modes, on average. Furthermore, we find the magnitude of panel consent bias to be more severe in self-administered surveys, but that implementing follow-up conversion procedures with the non-consenters diminishes panel consent bias to near-negligible levels. Lastly, we find the total recruitment bias (nonresponse and panel consent) to be similar in both mode groups—a reassuring result that is facilitated by the panel consent follow-up procedures. Implications of these findings for survey practice and suggestions for future research are provided in conclusion.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.