Measurement equivalence in mixed mode surveys

被引:64
|
作者
Hox, Joop J. [1 ]
De Leeuw, Edith D. [1 ]
Zijlmans, Eva A. O. [2 ]
机构
[1] Univ Utrecht, Dept Methodol & Stat, Utrecht, Netherlands
[2] Tilburg Univ, Dept Methodol & Stat, NL-5000 LE Tilburg, Netherlands
来源
FRONTIERS IN PSYCHOLOGY | 2015年 / 6卷
关键词
mixed mode survey; measurement equivalence; measurement invariance; mode effect; selection bias; propensity score adjustment; FACE-TO-FACE; MEASUREMENT INVARIANCE; TELEPHONE; WEB; MAIL;
D O I
10.3389/fpsyg.2015.00087
中图分类号
B84 [心理学];
学科分类号
04 ; 0402 ;
摘要
Surveys increasingly use mixed mode data collection (e.g., combining face-to-face and web) because this controls costs and helps to maintain good response rates. However, a combination of different survey modes in one study, be it cross-sectional or longitudinal, can lead to different kinds of measurement errors. For example, respondents in a face-to-face survey or a web survey may interpret the same question differently, and might give a different answer, just because of the way the question is presented. This effect of survey mode on the question-answer process is called measurement mode effect. This study develops methodological and statistical tools to identify the existence and size of mode effects in a mixed mode survey. In addition, it assesses the size and importance of mode effects in measurement instruments using a specific mixed mode panel survey (Netherlands Kinship Panel Study). Most measurement instruments in the NKPS are multi-item scales, therefore confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) will be used as the main analysis tool, using propensity score methods to correct for selection effects. The results show that the NKPS scales by and large have measurement equivalence, but in most cases only partial measurement equivalence. Controlling for respondent differences on demographic variables, and on scale scores from the previous uni-mode measurement occasion, tends to improve measurement equivalence, but not for all scales. The discussion ends with a review of the implications of our results for analyses employing these scales.
引用
收藏
页数:11
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] Measurement Equivalence in Sequential Mixed-Mode Surveys
    Sakshaug, Joseph W.
    Cernat, Alexandru
    Silverwood, Richard J.
    Ploubidis, George B.
    Calderwood, Lisa
    [J]. SURVEY RESEARCH METHODS, 2022, 16 (01): : 29 - 43
  • [2] Measurement Error Calibration in Mixed-mode Sample Surveys
    Buelens, Bart
    van den Brakel, Jan A.
    [J]. SOCIOLOGICAL METHODS & RESEARCH, 2015, 44 (03) : 391 - 426
  • [3] Mixed mode surveys
    Morris, J
    Adler, T
    [J]. TRANSPORT SURVEY QUALITY AND INNOVATION, 2003, : 239 - 252
  • [4] The Mode Effect in Mixed-Mode Surveys Mail and Web Surveys
    Borkan, Bengue
    [J]. SOCIAL SCIENCE COMPUTER REVIEW, 2010, 28 (03) : 371 - 380
  • [5] Mode effects in concurrent mixed-mode surveys
    Baek, Jeeseon
    Min, Kyung A.
    [J]. KOREAN JOURNAL OF APPLIED STATISTICS, 2016, 29 (05) : 787 - 806
  • [6] Measurement Equivalence of Web Surveys Based on Social Media
    Zhu Wenlong
    Shao Peiji
    Fang Jiaming
    [J]. ELEVENTH WUHAN INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON E-BUSINESS, 2012, : 225 - 230
  • [7] Comparing Two Inferential Approaches to Handling Measurement Error in Mixed-Mode Surveys
    Buelens, Bart
    Van den Brakel, Jan A.
    [J]. JOURNAL OF OFFICIAL STATISTICS, 2017, 33 (02) : 513 - 531
  • [8] Evaluating Relative Mode Effects in Mixed-Mode Surveys:: Three Methods to Disentangle Selection and Measurement Effects
    Vannieuwenhuyze, Jorre T. A.
    Loosveldt, Geert
    [J]. SOCIOLOGICAL METHODS & RESEARCH, 2013, 42 (01) : 82 - 104
  • [9] MEASURING AND TESTING THE INTERVIEW MODE EFFECT IN MIXED MODE SURVEYS
    Camillo, Furio
    D'Attoma, Ida
    [J]. STATISTICA, 2013, 73 (04): : 407 - 421
  • [10] A Method for Evaluating Mode Effects in Mixed-mode Surveys
    Vannieuwenhuyze, Jorre
    Loosveldt, Geert
    Molenberghs, Geert
    [J]. PUBLIC OPINION QUARTERLY, 2010, 74 (05) : 1027 - 1045