Home > Publications . Search All . Browse All . Country . Browse PSC Pubs . PSC Report Series

PSC In The News

RSS Feed icon

Stephenson says homophobia among gay men raises risk of intimate partner violence

Frey says having more immigrants with higher birth rates fills need in the US

Inglehart's work on the rise of populism cited in NYT

More News

Highlights

Savolainen wins Outstanding Contribution Award for study of how employment affects recidivism among past criminal offenders

Giving Blueday at ISR focuses on investing in the next generation of social scientists

Pfeffer and Schoeni cover the economic and social dimensions of wealth inequality in this special issue

PRB Policy Communication Training Program for PhD students in demography, reproductive health, population health

More Highlights

Next Brown Bag

Mon, Jan 23, 2017 at noon:
H. Luke Shaefer

Support for the Survey Sponsor and Nonresponse Bias

Publication Abstract

Groves, Robert M., S. Presser, Roger Tourangeau, Brady T. West, Mick P. Couper, Eleanor Singer, and C. Toppe. 2012. "Support for the Survey Sponsor and Nonresponse Bias." Public Opinion Quarterly, 76(3): 512-524.

In an experiment designed to examine nonresponse bias, either the March of Dimes or the University of Michigan was identified as the sponsor of a survey mailed to individuals whose level of support for the March of Dimes was known. The response rate was higher to the university survey, but support for the March of Dimes increased survey participation to the same extent in both conditions. As a result of the overrepresentation of supporters of the organization, both surveys showed nonresponse bias for variables linked to support. The bias was greater, however, when the sponsor was identified as the March of Dimes. Thus, the university sponsor brought in not only more of the sample but also a more representative sample on variables related to support for the March of Dimes. Overall, the magnitude of the relationship between support for the organization and nonresponse was not a strong predictor of the magnitude of the nonresponse bias. The results demonstrate that the simple common cause model of nonresponse will not always apply, and that the model should be extended to incorporate multiple auxiliary variables.

DOI:10.1093/poq/nfs034 (Full Text)

Browse | Search : All Pubs | Next