Журнал: Социологический журнал

Рогозин Д. М.

Результативность телефонного опроса в зависимости от ограничений на выбор респондента внутри домохозяйства

Полный текст

Ссылка при цитировании:

Рубрика:

Выражение признательности

Литература:

• Biemer P.P. Measuring data quality // Telephone survey methodology / Ed. by R.M. Groves, P.P. Biemer, L.E. Lyberg, et al. New York: John Wiley & Sons, 2001. P. 273-282.
• Cannel C.F., Miller P.V., Oksenberg L. Research on interviewing tech-niques // Sociological methodology / Ed. by S. Leinhardt. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 1981.
• Couper M.P., Groves R.M. Introductory interactions in telephone surveys and nonresponse // Standartization and tacit knowledge: Interaction and practice in the survey interview / Ed. by D.W. Maynard, H. Houtkoop-Steenstra, N.G. Schaeffer, J. van der Zouwen. New York: John Wiley & Sons, 2002. P. 161-177.
• Curtin R., Presser S., Singer E. Changes in telephone survey nonresponse over the past quarter century // Public Opinion Quarterly. 2005. Vol. 69. No. 1. P. 87-98.
• Diekmann A. Empirische Sozialforschung: Grundlagen, Methoden, Anwendungen. 11. Auflage. Hamburg: Rowohlt Taschenbuch Verlag, 2004.
• Dijkstra W., Smit J.H. Persuading reluctant recipients in telephone surveys // Survey nonresponse / Ed. by R.M. Groves, D.A. Dillman, J.L. Eltinge, R.J. Little. New York: John Wiley & Sons, 2002. P. 121-134.
• Dillman D.A., Eltinge J.L., Groves R.M., Little R.J. Survey nonresponse in design, data collection, and analysis // Survey nonresponse / Ed. by R.M. Groves, D.A. Dillman, J.L. Eltinge, R.J. Little. New York: John Wiley & Sons, 2002. P. 3-26.
• Ervin-Tripp S. [Rev.] Telephone calls: Unity and diversity in conversational structure across languages and cultures / Ed. by K.K. Luke, T. Pavlidou. Benjamins, Amsterdam, 2002 // Journal of Pragmatics. 2005. Vol. 37. P. 763-767.
• Fowler F.J. The case for more split-sample experiments in developing survey instruments // Methods for testing and evaluating survey questionnaires / Ed. by S. Presser, J.M. Rothgeb, M.P. Couper, et al. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons, 2004. P. 173-188.
• Fowler F.J., Mangione T.W. Standardized survey interviewing: Minimizing interviewer-related error. Newbury Park: Sage Publications, 1990.
• Groves R.M. Theories and methods of telephone surveys // Annual Review of Sociology. 1990. Vol. 16. P. 221-240.
• Groves R.M., Couper M.P. Contact-level influences on cooperation in face-to-face surveys // Journal of Official Statistic. 1996. Vol. 12. P. 63-83.
• Groves R.M., Lyberg L.E. An overview on nonresponse issues in telephone surveys // Telephone survey methodology / Ed. by R.M. Groves, P.P. Biemer, L.E. Lyberg, et al. New York: John Wiley & Sons, 2001. P. 191-211.
• Hagan D.E., Collier C.M. Must respondent selection procedures for tele-phone surveys be invasive? // Public Opinion Quarterly. 1983. Vol. 47. P. 547-556.
• Houtkoop-Steenstra H. Interaction and the standardized survey interview: The living questionnaire. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2000.
• Houtkoop-Steenstra H., Bergh H. van den Effects of introductions in large-scale telephone survey interviews // Sociological Methods & Research. 2000. Vol. 28. No. 3. P. 281-300.
• Hox J.J., Leeuw E.D. de A comparison of nonresponse in mail, telephone, and face-to-face surveys // Quality and Quantity. 1994. Vol. 28. P. 329-344.
• Keeter S., Miller C., Konut A., et al. Consequences of reducing nonresponse in a national telephone survey // Public Opinion Quarterly. 2000. Vol. 64. P. 125-148.
• Kish L. A procedure for objective respondent selection within the household // Journal of the American Statistical Association. 1949. Vol. 44. No. 247. P. 380-387.
• Kish L. Survey sampling. New York: John Wiley, 1965.
• Lavarkas P.J., Stasny E.A., Harpuder B. A further investigation of the last-birthday respondent selection method and within-unit coverage error // Proceeding of the Survey research method section, American Statistical Association. New York, 2000. P. 890-895.
• Lind K., Link M., Oldendick R. A comparison of the accuracy of the last birthday versus the next birthday methods for random selection of household respondents // Proceeding of the Survey research method section, American Statistical Association. New York, 2000. P. 887-889.
• Lynch M. The living text: Writing instructions and situated actions in telephone surveys // Standartization and tacit knowledge: Interaction and practice in the survey interview / Ed. by D.W. Maynard, H. Houtkoop-Steenstra, N.G. Schaeffer, J. van der Zouwen. New York: John Wiley & Sons, 2002. P. 125-150.
• Maklan D., Waksberg J. Within-household coverage in RDD surveys // Telephone survey methodology / Ed. by R.M. Groves, P.P. Biemer, L.E. Lyberg, et al. New York: John Wiley & Sons, 2001. P. 51-69.
• Martin E. Who knows who lives here? Within-household disagreements as a source of survey coverage error // Public Opinion Quarterly. 1999. Vol. 63. No. 2. P. 220-236.
• Maynard D.W., Schaeffer N.C. Refusal conversion and tailoring // Standartization and tacit knowledge: Interaction and practice in the survey interview / Ed. by D.W. Maynard, H. Houtkoop-Steenstra, N.G. Schaeffer, J. van der Zouwen. New York: John Wiley & Sons, 2002. P. 219-239.
• Monsees M.L., Massey J.T. Adapting procedures for collecting demographic data in a personal interview to a telephone interview // Proceedings of the section on survey research methods, American Statistical Association. New York, 1979. P. 130-135.
• Morton-Williams J. Interviewer approaches. Aldershot: Dartmouth Publishing Company, 1993.
• Morton-Williams J., Young P. Obtaining the survey interview ? an analysis of tape recorded doorstep introductions // Journal of the Market Research Society. 1987. Vol. 29. P. 35-54.
• O’Neil M.J. Estimating the nonresponse bias due in telephone surveys // Public Opinion Quarterly. 1979. Vol. 43. No. 2. P. 218-232.
• Parsons J.A., Warnecke R.B., Czaja R.F., et al. Factors associated with response rates in a national survey of primary-care physicians // Evaluation Review. 1994. Vol. 18. No. 6. P. 756-766.
• Peterson T. Das Feldexperiment in der Umfrageforschung. Frankfurt: Cam-pus, 2002.
• Potter J. [Rev.] Studying the standardized survey as interaction: H. Houtkoop-Steenstra. Interaction and the standardized survey interview. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2000; D.W. Maynard, H. Houtkoop-Steenstra, N.C. Schaeffer, J. van der Zouwen. Standardization and tacit knowledge: Interaction and practice in the survey interview. New York: Wiley, 2002 // Qualitative Research. 2003. Vol. 3. No. 2. P. 269-278.
• Rizzo L., Brick J.M., Park I. A minimal intrusive method for sampling persons in random digit dial surveys // Public Opinion Quarterly. 2004. Vol. 68. No. 2. P. 267-274.
• Salmon C.T., Nichols J.S. The next-birthday method of respond selection // Public Opinion Quarterly. 1983. Vol. 47. P. 270-276.
• Scholl A. Die Befragung: Sozialwissenschaftliche Methode und kommunikationswissenschaftliche Anwendung. Konstanz: UVK Verlagsgesellschaft mbH, 2003.
• Schuman H., Presser S. Questions and answers in attitude surveys: Experi-ments on question form, wording, and context. San Diego: Academic Press, 1981.
• Sebold J. Survey period length, unanswered numbers, and nonresponse in telephone surveys // Telephone survey methodology / Ed. by R.M. Groves, P.P. Biemer, L.E. Lyberg, et al. New York: John Wiley & Sons, 2001. P. 247-256.
• Singleton R.A., Straits B.C. Survey interviewing // Handbook of interview research: Context and method / Ed. by J.F. Gubrium, J.A. Holstein. London: Sage Publications, 2002. P. 59-82.
• Standard definitions: Final dispositions of case codes and outcome rates for surveys / The American Association for Public Opinion Research. 3rd. ed. Lenexa, Kanzas: AAPOR, 2004. [Русский перевод: Стандартные определения: систематическое описание диспозиционных кодов и коэффициентов результативности для массовых опросов (Американская ассоциация исследователей общественного мнения. 3-е изд. 2004 г.) / Пер. с англ. Д.М. Рогозина, Е.М. Киселева // Социологический журнал. 2005. № 2. С. 78 119].
• Tourangeau R., Singer E., Presser S. Context effects in attitude surveys: Effects on remote and impact on predictive validity // Sociological Methods & Research. 2003. Vol. 31. No. 4. P. 486-513.
• Troldahl V., Carter R. Random selection of respondents within households in telephone surveys // Journal of Marketing Research. 1964. Vol. 1. P. 71-76.
• Willimack D.K. Nichols E., Sudman S. Understanding unit and item nonre-sponse in business surveys // Survey nonresponse / Ed. by R.M. Groves, D.A. Dillman, J.L. Eltinge, R.J. Little. New York: John Wiley & Sons, 2002. P. 213-242.
• Андреенков В.Г., Голофаст В.Б., Кабыща А.В. и др. Логика социологи-ческого исследования. М.: Наука, 1987.
• Батыгин Г.С. Лекции по методологии социологических исследований. М.: Аспект Пресс, 1995.
• Бутенко И.А. Организация прикладного социологического исследова-ния. М.: Тривола, 1998.
• Девятко И.Ф. Методы социологического исследования: Учебное посо-бие. 3-е изд. М.: Книжный дом «Университет», 2003.
• Докторов Б.З. К попытке определения пространства американских ме-тодических исследований опросных технологий // Социология: методо-логия, методы, математические модели. 2005. № 20. С. 10 31.
• Мануильская К.М. [Рец.] Полевой эксперимент в прикладных исследованиях: Peterson T. Das Feldexperiment in der Umfrageforschung. Frank-furt: Campus, 2002 // Социологический журнал. 2004. № 3/4. С. 201 209.
• Ноэль Э. Массовые опросы: введение в методику демоскопии / Пер. с нем. М.И. Зайцевой, Л.Н. Крючковой; Под ред. Н.С. Мансурова. М.: Ава-Эстра, 1993.
• Рогозин Д.М. Влияние интервьюера на доступность респондентов в телефонном опросе // Социологический журнал. 2004. № 1/2. С. 75 105.
• Соколова Н.Л. О системном характере речевого этикета // Филологические науки. 2005. № 1. С. 43 52.
• Чесноков С.В. Детерминационный анализ социально-экономических данных. М.: Наука, 1982.

Содержание выпуска

>> Содержание выпуска 2005. № 3.

>> Архив журнала