The relative impact of interviewer effects and sample design effects on survey precision

103Citations
Citations of this article
80Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

Abstract

One of the principal sources of error in data collected from structured face-to-face interviews is the interviewer. The other major component of imprecision in survey estimates is sampling variance. It is rare, however, to find studies in which the complex sampling variance and the complex interviewer variance are both computed. This paper compares the relative impact of interviewer effects and sample design effects on survey precision by making use of an interpenetrated primary sampling unit-interviewer experiment which was designed by the authors for implementation in the second wave of the British Household Panel Study as part of its scientific programme. It also illustrates the use of a multilevel (hierarchical) approach in which the interviewer and sample design effects are estimated simultaneously while being incorporated in a substantive model of interest.

References Powered by Scopus

Studies of Interviewer Variance for Attitudinal Variables

111Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Measuring and explaining interviewer effects in centralized telephone surveys

91Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Some sources of interviewer variance in surveys

62Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Cited by Powered by Scopus

Intimate partner violence: Causes and prevention

1343Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Violence against women: Global scope and magnitude

788Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Risk factors for domestic violence: Findings from a South African cross-sectional study

573Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

O’Muircheartaigh, C., & Campanelli, P. (1998). The relative impact of interviewer effects and sample design effects on survey precision. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society. Series A: Statistics in Society, 161(1), 63–77. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-985X.00090

Readers' Seniority

Tooltip

PhD / Post grad / Masters / Doc 38

62%

Researcher 14

23%

Professor / Associate Prof. 5

8%

Lecturer / Post doc 4

7%

Readers' Discipline

Tooltip

Social Sciences 42

78%

Economics, Econometrics and Finance 7

13%

Psychology 3

6%

Business, Management and Accounting 2

4%

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free