Cargando…

Measurement equivalence in mixed mode surveys

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 measu...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Hox, Joop J., De Leeuw, Edith D., Zijlmans, Eva A. O.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Frontiers Media S.A. 2015
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4318282/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25699002
http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2015.00087
_version_ 1782355832137056256
author Hox, Joop J.
De Leeuw, Edith D.
Zijlmans, Eva A. O.
author_facet Hox, Joop J.
De Leeuw, Edith D.
Zijlmans, Eva A. O.
author_sort Hox, Joop J.
collection PubMed
description 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.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4318282
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2015
publisher Frontiers Media S.A.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-43182822015-02-19 Measurement equivalence in mixed mode surveys Hox, Joop J. De Leeuw, Edith D. Zijlmans, Eva A. O. Front Psychol Psychology 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. Frontiers Media S.A. 2015-02-05 /pmc/articles/PMC4318282/ /pubmed/25699002 http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2015.00087 Text en Copyright © 2015 Hox, De Leeuw and Zijlmans. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) or licensor are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.
spellingShingle Psychology
Hox, Joop J.
De Leeuw, Edith D.
Zijlmans, Eva A. O.
Measurement equivalence in mixed mode surveys
title Measurement equivalence in mixed mode surveys
title_full Measurement equivalence in mixed mode surveys
title_fullStr Measurement equivalence in mixed mode surveys
title_full_unstemmed Measurement equivalence in mixed mode surveys
title_short Measurement equivalence in mixed mode surveys
title_sort measurement equivalence in mixed mode surveys
topic Psychology
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4318282/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25699002
http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2015.00087
work_keys_str_mv AT hoxjoopj measurementequivalenceinmixedmodesurveys
AT deleeuwedithd measurementequivalenceinmixedmodesurveys
AT zijlmansevaao measurementequivalenceinmixedmodesurveys