Cargando…
What Do You Think? Using Expert Opinion to Improve Predictions of Response Propensity Under a Bayesian Framework
Responsive survey designs introduce protocol changes to survey operations based on accumulating paradata. Case-level predictions, including response propensity, can be used to tailor data collection features in pursuit of cost or quality goals. Unfortunately, predictions based only on partial data f...
Autores principales: | , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
2020
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8174793/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34093885 http://dx.doi.org/10.12758/mda.2020.05 |
_version_ | 1783702972760326144 |
---|---|
author | Coffey, Stephanie West, Brady T. Wagner, James Elliott, Michael R. |
author_facet | Coffey, Stephanie West, Brady T. Wagner, James Elliott, Michael R. |
author_sort | Coffey, Stephanie |
collection | PubMed |
description | Responsive survey designs introduce protocol changes to survey operations based on accumulating paradata. Case-level predictions, including response propensity, can be used to tailor data collection features in pursuit of cost or quality goals. Unfortunately, predictions based only on partial data from the current round of data collection can be biased, leading to ineffective tailoring. Bayesian approaches can provide protection against this bias. Prior beliefs, which are generated from data external to the current survey implementation, contribute information that may be lacking from the partial current data. Those priors are then updated with the accumulating paradata. The elicitation of the prior beliefs, then, is an important characteristic of these approaches. While historical data for the same or a similar survey may be the most natural source for generating priors, eliciting prior beliefs from experienced survey managers may be a reasonable choice for new surveys, or when historical data are not available. Here, we fielded a questionnaire to survey managers, asking about expected attempt-level response rates for different subgroups of cases, and developed prior distributions for attempt-level response propensity model coefficients based on the mean and standard error of their responses. Then, using respondent data from a real survey, we compared the predictions of response propensity when the expert knowledge is incorporated into a prior to those based on a standard method that considers accumulating paradata only, as well as a method that incorporates historical survey data. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-8174793 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2020 |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-81747932021-06-03 What Do You Think? Using Expert Opinion to Improve Predictions of Response Propensity Under a Bayesian Framework Coffey, Stephanie West, Brady T. Wagner, James Elliott, Michael R. Methoden Daten Anal Article Responsive survey designs introduce protocol changes to survey operations based on accumulating paradata. Case-level predictions, including response propensity, can be used to tailor data collection features in pursuit of cost or quality goals. Unfortunately, predictions based only on partial data from the current round of data collection can be biased, leading to ineffective tailoring. Bayesian approaches can provide protection against this bias. Prior beliefs, which are generated from data external to the current survey implementation, contribute information that may be lacking from the partial current data. Those priors are then updated with the accumulating paradata. The elicitation of the prior beliefs, then, is an important characteristic of these approaches. While historical data for the same or a similar survey may be the most natural source for generating priors, eliciting prior beliefs from experienced survey managers may be a reasonable choice for new surveys, or when historical data are not available. Here, we fielded a questionnaire to survey managers, asking about expected attempt-level response rates for different subgroups of cases, and developed prior distributions for attempt-level response propensity model coefficients based on the mean and standard error of their responses. Then, using respondent data from a real survey, we compared the predictions of response propensity when the expert knowledge is incorporated into a prior to those based on a standard method that considers accumulating paradata only, as well as a method that incorporates historical survey data. 2020 /pmc/articles/PMC8174793/ /pubmed/34093885 http://dx.doi.org/10.12758/mda.2020.05 Text en https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 License. Any further distribution of this work must maintain attribution to the author(s) and the title of the work, journal citation and DOI. |
spellingShingle | Article Coffey, Stephanie West, Brady T. Wagner, James Elliott, Michael R. What Do You Think? Using Expert Opinion to Improve Predictions of Response Propensity Under a Bayesian Framework |
title | What Do You Think? Using Expert Opinion to Improve Predictions of Response Propensity Under a Bayesian Framework |
title_full | What Do You Think? Using Expert Opinion to Improve Predictions of Response Propensity Under a Bayesian Framework |
title_fullStr | What Do You Think? Using Expert Opinion to Improve Predictions of Response Propensity Under a Bayesian Framework |
title_full_unstemmed | What Do You Think? Using Expert Opinion to Improve Predictions of Response Propensity Under a Bayesian Framework |
title_short | What Do You Think? Using Expert Opinion to Improve Predictions of Response Propensity Under a Bayesian Framework |
title_sort | what do you think? using expert opinion to improve predictions of response propensity under a bayesian framework |
topic | Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8174793/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34093885 http://dx.doi.org/10.12758/mda.2020.05 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT coffeystephanie whatdoyouthinkusingexpertopiniontoimprovepredictionsofresponsepropensityunderabayesianframework AT westbradyt whatdoyouthinkusingexpertopiniontoimprovepredictionsofresponsepropensityunderabayesianframework AT wagnerjames whatdoyouthinkusingexpertopiniontoimprovepredictionsofresponsepropensityunderabayesianframework AT elliottmichaelr whatdoyouthinkusingexpertopiniontoimprovepredictionsofresponsepropensityunderabayesianframework |