Comparative analysis of within-household respondent selection techniques
Abstract
A probability sample of households frequently must be translated into a sample of persons representing characteristics of the adult population. Researchers have developed at least 14 within-household respondent selection procedures or their variants to accomplish this task. Although probability methods are preferable, they often increase nonresponse. Quasi-probability and nonprobability techniques have been devised to increase cooperation and decrease costs, although they sacrifice the advantages of randomness. The purpose of this paper is to analyze the results of 16 studies that have compared within-household respondent selection procedures, with respect to demographic representativeness, cooperation or response rates, and costs. Although there is an increasing need to hold down costs yet maintain quality and accuracy as response rates are falling, little systematic, accessible evidence exists to guide choice of respondent selection method.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Within-household randomization used the Next Birthday Method, which ensures an equal probability of selection of all household members.
“To ensure randomization within household, the”
From Till logout do us part? Comparison of factors predicting excessive social network sites use and addiction between Singaporean adolescents and adults (2017) · cites this paper as Gaziano, 2005
Cites
Survey Errors and Survey Costs.
Faulkenberry, G. D., & Groves, R. M. (1990) · Journal of the American Statistical Association · doi:10.2307/2289634 · Cited by 1,443 · see citing works
Nonresponse In Household Interview Surveys
Ziegel, E., Groves, R., & Couper, M. (1998) · Technometrics · doi:10.2307/1271375 · Cited by 1,283 · see citing works
A Procedure for Objective Respondent Selection within the Household
Kish, L. (1949) · Journal of the American Statistical Association · doi:10.1080/01621459.1949.10483314 · Cited by 1,218 · see citing works
Telephone Survey Methods: Sampling, Selection and Supervision
Fowler, F. J., & Lavrakas, P. J. (1988) · Journal of the American Statistical Association · doi:10.2307/2290176 · Cited by 397 · see citing works
Surveys by Telephone: A National Comparison with Personal Interviews.
Ferree, G. D., Groves, R. M., & Kahn, R. L. (1982) · Contemporary Sociology A Journal of Reviews · doi:10.2307/2066654 · Cited by 371 · see citing works
The Next-Birthday Method of Respondent Selection
Salmon, C. T., & Nichols, J. S. (1983) · Public Opinion Quarterly · doi:10.1086/268785 · Cited by 309 · see citing works
A Procedure for Objective Respondent Selection within the Household
Kish, L. (1949) · Journal of the American Statistical Association · doi:10.2307/2280236 · Cited by 167 · see citing works
Random Selection of Respondents within Households in Phone Surveys
Troldahl, V. C., & Carter, R. E. (1964) · Journal of Marketing Research · doi:10.1177/002224376400100212 · Cited by 140 · see citing works
Improving Random Respondent Selection in Telephone Surveys
O'Rourke, D. M., & Blair, J. (1983) · Journal of Marketing Research · doi:10.1177/002224378302000409 · Cited by 117 · see citing works
Binson, D., Canchola, J. A., & Catania, J. A. (2000) · Journal of Official Statistics · Cited by 98 · see citing works
A Minimally Intrusive Method for Sampling Persons in Random Digit Dial Surveys
Rizzo, L. (2004) · Public Opinion Quarterly · doi:10.1093/poq/nfh014 · Cited by 88 · see citing works
An Attempt to Get the “Not at Homes” into the Sample Without Callbacks
Politz, A., & Simmons, W. R. (1949) · Journal of the American Statistical Association · doi:10.1080/01621459.1949.10483288 · Cited by 78 · see citing works
Improving Random Respondent Selection in Telephone Surveys
O'Rourke, D., & Blair, J. (1983) · Journal of Marketing Research · doi:10.2307/3151446 · Cited by 75 · see citing works
Respondent Selection in a Time of Changing Household Composition
Bryant, B. E. (1975) · Journal of Marketing Research · doi:10.1177/002224377501200201 · Cited by 65 · see citing works
Must Respondent Selection Procedures for Telephone Surveys Be Invasive?
Hagan, D. E., & Collier, C. M. (1983) · Public Opinion Quarterly · doi:10.1086/268811 · Cited by 43 · see citing works
The Importance of Persistence in Respondent Selection for Preelection Surveys
Traugott, M. W. (1987) · Public Opinion Quarterly · doi:10.1086/269013 · Cited by 38 · see citing works
Respondent Selection in a Telephone Survey: A Comparison of Three Techniques
Czaja, R., Blair, J., & Sebestik, J. P. (1982) · Journal of Marketing Research · doi:10.1177/002224378201900312 · Cited by 29 · see citing works
Note on “An Attempt to Get the Not-at-Homes into the Sample Without Callbacks”
Politz, A., & Simmons, W. R. (1950) · Journal of the American Statistical Association · doi:10.1080/01621459.1950.10483343 · Cited by 21 · see citing works
Kish Method for Mail Survey Respondent Selection
Reich, J. H., Yates, W. R., & Woolson, R. F. (1986) · American Journal of Public Health · doi:10.2105/ajph.76.2.206 · Cited by 19 · see citing works
Respondent Selection in a Telephone Survey: A Comparison of Three Techniques
Czaja, R., Blair, J., & Sebestik, J. P. (1982) · Journal of Marketing Research · doi:10.2307/3151573 · Cited by 19 · see citing works
A Computer-Generated Sampling Table for Selecting Respondents Within Households
Paisley, W., & Parker, E. B. (1965) · Public Opinion Quarterly · doi:10.1086/267343 · Cited by 13 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Ho, S. S., Lwin, M. O., & Lee, E. W. J. (2017) · Computers in Human Behavior · doi:10.1016/j.chb.2017.06.002 · Cited by 117 · see citing works
Price, M., Gros, D. F., McCauley, J. L., Gros, K. S., & Ruggiero, K. J. (2012) · Psychiatry: Interpersonal and Biological Processes · doi:10.1521/psyc.2012.75.3.267 · Cited by 49 · see citing works
Price, M., Davidson, T. M., Andrews, J. O., & Ruggiero, K. J. (2013) · Journal of Telemedicine and Telecare · doi:10.1177/1357633x13476230 · Cited by 28 · see citing works
Validity and reliability of the Brief Insomnia Questionnaire in the general population in Hong Kong
Chung, K.-F., Yeung, W.-F., Ho, F. Y.-Y., Ho, L.-M., Yung, K.-P., Yu, Y.-M., & Kwok, C.-W. (2014) · Journal of Psychosomatic Research · doi:10.1016/j.jpsychores.2014.03.002 · Cited by 24 · see citing works
- Authors
- Gaziano, C.
- Affiliations
- Research Solutions (United States) (US)
- Corresponding author
- Gaziano, C.
- ORCID
- Gaziano, C.
- Venue
- Public Opinion Quarterly
- Publisher
- Oxford University Press (OUP)
- Published
- 2005-01-01
- Volume
- 69
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 124-157
- ISSN
- 0033-362X (ISSN-L)
- 1537-5331
- OpenAlex
- W2120281673
- Cited by
- 126
- References
- 21
- Citations by year
- 2026: 3 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 5 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 3 · 2021: 2 · 2020: 5 · 2019: 13 · 2018: 8 · 2017: 9 · 2016: 7 · 2015: 7 · 2014: 15 · 2013: 13 · 2012: 8
- FWCI
- 10.93
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Public Opinion Quarterly (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Survey Methodology and Nonresponse
- Physical Sciences › Mathematics › Statistics and Probability › Survey Sampling and Estimation Techniques
- Physical Sciences › Mathematics › Statistics and Probability › Census and Population Estimation
- Keywords
- nonresponse, response rate, cooperation, demographic representativeness, survey costs, probability sampling, non-probability sampling, household surveys
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
