Evaluation of Differences in Giving and Volunteering Data Collected by In-Home and Telephone Interviewing

Kirsch, Arthur D.; McCormackw, Michael T.; Saxon-Harrold, Susan K. E.

doi:10.1177/0899764001303007

Cited by 10 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…First, the GVS data are the only nationally representative survey that asked respondents both about being recruited to volunteer and social interactions with friends and family across multiple domains. 7 Second, unlike other years from the biennial series of GVS, the biases from the 1999 survey have been examined (Kirsch, McCormack, & Saxon-Harrold, 2001). The data were collected with a parallel telephone survey, which had a response rate of 45%.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Social Networks, Recruitment, and Volunteering: Are Social Capital Effects Conditional on Recruitment?

Paik

Navarre-Jackson

2010

Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly

100

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Prior research has found that several types of social networks—social and associational ties, religious involvement, and recruitment contacts—promote volunteering. This article extends the literature by examining whether social tie diversity matters for volunteering and whether the effects of social networks are conditional on being recruited or not. Using the 1999 Giving and Volunteering Survey, the authors estimated probit models of being asked to volunteer and volunteering. The results show that social tie diversity, the number of associational ties, and religious involvement are each associated with recruitment. Recruitment itself is an important predictor of volunteering. Religious involvement is associated with higher probabilities of volunteering conditional on being asked, whereas social tie diversity and the number of associational ties increase volunteering among those not asked.The results indicate that associations between social networks and volunteering depend on both recruitment and whether these relationships create bridging versus bonding social capital.

show abstract

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Social Networks, Recruitment, and Volunteering: Are Social Capital Effects Conditional on Recruitment?

Paik

Navarre-Jackson

2010

Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly

100

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The actual rate has not been published. This figure is taken fromKirsch, McCormack, and Saxon-Harrold's (2001) general discussion of response rates in the Giving and Volunteering series. c. This is the cumulative response rate since 1989.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

The Quality and Comparability of Survey Data on Charitable Giving

Wilhelm

2007

Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article examines six major household surveys of charitable giving and attempts to trace differences in estimates to underlying differences in survey methodology. The main result is that surveys that cue respondent recall by directing attention to charities' outputs and use interviewers experienced in obtaining information about dollar amounts measure larger amounts of giving. Even so, it is very difficult to estimate giving at the top of the distribution without a high-income oversample: Only one of the surveys not containing a high-income oversample produces estimates around the 90th percentile similar to that obtained with a high-income oversample.

show abstract

“…These surveys are crucial to research, policy, and advocacy in the nonprofit field. These advantages notwithstanding, the 2001 INDEPENDENT SECTOR survey adopted new methodology and sampling criteria that limit comparability with the surveys of the past decade, thus accentuating the problem of data consistency (Kirsch, McCormack, and Saxon-Harrold, 2001). The future of national surveys on giving and volunteering is uncertain, thus complicating the maintenance and continuation of longitudinal trends, which depend on consistent data sets and methodologies.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%