SEARCH

SEARCH BY CITATION

References

  • Abraham, K. G., Maitland, A. and Bianchi, S. M. (2006) Nonresponse in the American time use survey: who is missing from the data and how much does it matter? Publ. Opin. Q., 70, 676703.
  • Behr, A., Bellgardt, E. and Rendtel, U. (2005) Extent and determinants of panel attrition in the European Community Household Panel. Eur. Sociol. Rev., 21, 489512.
  • Burton, J., Laurie, H. and Lynn, P. (2006) The long-term effectiveness of refusal conversion procedures on longitudinal surveys. J. R. Statist. Soc. A, 169, 459478.
  • Church, A. H. (1993) Estimating the effect of incentives on mail survey response rates: a meta-analysis. Publ. Opin. Q., 57, 6279.
  • Cohen, A. S., Patrick, D. C. and Shern, D. L. (1996) Minimizing attrition in longitudinal studies of special populations: an integrated management approach. Evaln Program Planng, 19, 309319.
  • Couper, M. P. and Ofstedal, M. B. (2009) Keeping in contact with mobile sample members. In Methodology of Longitudinal Surveys (ed. P. Lynn), pp. 183203. New York: Wiley.
  • Fitzgerald, J., Gottschalk, P. and Moffit, P. (1998) An analysis of sample attrition in panel data: the Michigan Panel Study of Income Dynamics. J. Hum. Resour., 33, 251299.
  • Freedman, D., Thornton, A. and Camburn, D. (1980) Maintaining response rates in longitudinal studies. Sociol. Meth. Res., 9, 8789.
  • Groves, R. M. (2006) Non-response rates and non-response bias in household surveys. Publ. Opin. Q., 70, 646675.
  • Groves, R., Cialdini, R. and Couper, M. (1992) Understanding the decision to participate in a survey. Publ. Opin. Q., 56, 475495.
  • Groves, M. R. and Couper, M. P. (1998) Nonresponse in Household Interview Surveys. New York: Wiley.
  • Groves, R. M., Couper, M., Presser, S., Singer, E., Tourangeau, R., Piani Acosta, G. and Nelson, L. (2006) Experiments in producing non-response bias. Publ. Opin. Q., 70, 720736.
  • Groves, R. M., Singer, E. and Corning, A. (2000) Leverage-saliency theory of survey participation: description and an illustration. Publ. Opin. Q., 64, 299308.
  • James, T. L. (1997) Results of the wave 1 incentive experiment in the 1996 Survey of Income and Program participation. Proc. Surv. Res. Meth. Sect. Am. Statist. Ass., 834839.
  • Kalton, G. (2009) Surveys across time. In Sample Surveys: Inference and Analysis (eds C. R. Rao and D. Pfeffermann). New York: Elsevier.
  • Laurie, H. and Lynn, P. (2009) The use of respondent incentives on longitudinal surveys. In Methodology of Longitudinal Surveys (ed. P. Lynn), pp. 205233. New York: Wiley.
  • Laurie, H., Smith, R. and Scott, L. (1999) Strategies for reducing nonresponse in a longitudinal panel survey. J. Off. Statist., 15, 269282.
  • Lepkowski, J. M. and Couper, M. P. (2002) Nonresponse in longitudinal household surveys. In Survey Nonresponse (eds R. M. Groves, D. Dillman, J. Eltinge and R. J. A. Little), pp. 259272. New York: Wiley.
  • Lillard, L. A. and Panis, C. W. A. (1998) Panel attrition from the Panel Study of Income Dynamics. J. Polit. Econ., 94, 489506.
  • Lynn, P. (ed.) (2006) Quality Profile: British Household Panel Survey, Version 2.0: Waves 1–13, 1991-2003. Colchester: University of Essex. (Available from http://www.iser.essex.ac.uk/bhps/quality-profile.)
  • Lynn, P. and Clarke, P. (2002) Separating refusal bias and non-contact bias: evidence from UK national surveys. Statistician, 51, 319333.
  • Lynn, P., Thomson, K. and Brook, L. (1998) An experiment with incentives on the British Social Attitudes survey. Surv. Meth. Cent. Newslett., 18, 1214.
  • McGonagle, K. A., Couper, M. P. and Schoeni, R. F. (2011) Keeping track of panel members: an experimental test of a between-wave contact strategy. J. Off. Statist., 27, 319338.
  • Petrolia, D. R. and Bhattacharjee, S. (2009) Revisiting incentive effect: evidence from a random sample mail survey on consumer preferences for fuel ethanol. Publ. Opin. Q., 73, 537550.
  • Ribisl, K. M., Walton, M. A., Mowbray, C. T., Luke, D. A., Davidson II, W. S. and Bootsmiller, B. J. (1996) Minimizing participant attrition in panel studies through the use of effective retention and tracing strategies: review and recommendations. Evaln Program Planng, 19, 125.
  • Rodgers, W. (2002) Size of incentive effects in a longitudinal study. Mimeo . Survey Research Centre, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor.
  • Scott, C. K. (2004) A replicated model for achieving over 90% follow-up rates in longitudinal studies of substance abusers. Drug Alc. Depend., 74, 2136.
  • Singer, E. (2002) The use of incentives to reduce nonresponse in household surveys. In Survey Nonresponse (eds R. M. Groves, D. A. Dillman, J. L. Eltinge and R. J. A. Little), pp. 163177. New York: Wiley.
  • Singer, E., Gebler, N., Raghunathan, T., van Hoewyk, J. and McGonagle, K. (1999) The effect on incentives in telephone and face-to-face surveys. J. Off. Statist., 15, 217230.
  • Stoop, I. A. L. (2005) The Hunt for the Last Respondent. The Hague: Social and Cultural Planning Office.
  • Taylor, M. F. (ed.) (2010) British Household Panel Survey User Manual, vol. A,Introduction, Technical Report and Appendices. Colchester: University of Essex. (Available from http://www.iser.essex.ac.uk/bhps/documentation/pdf__versions/.)
  • Uhrig, S. C. N. (2008) The nature and causes of attrition in the British Household Panel Study. Working Paper 2008-05. Institute for Social and Economic Research, University of Essex, Colchester. (Available from http://www.iser.essex.ac.uk/publications/working-papers/iser/2008-05.)
  • Watson, N. and Wooden, M. (2009) Identifying factors affecting longitudinal survey response. In Methodology of Longitudinal Surveys(ed. P. Lynn), pp. 157181. New York: Wiley.
  • Zabel, J. E. (1998) An analysis of attrition in the Panel Study of Income Dynamics and the Survey of Income and Program Participation with an application to a model of labor market behavior. J. Hum. Resour., 33, 479506.