Using Response Propensity Models to Improve the Quality of Response Data in Longitudinal Studies

We review two approaches for improving the response in longitudinal (birth cohort) studies based on response propensity models: strategies for sample maintenance in longitudinal studies and improving the representativeness of the respondents over time through interventions. Based on estimated respon...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Journal of official statistics 2017-09, Vol.33 (3), p.753-779
Hauptverfasser: Plewis, Ian, Shlomo, Natalie
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:We review two approaches for improving the response in longitudinal (birth cohort) studies based on response propensity models: strategies for sample maintenance in longitudinal studies and improving the representativeness of the respondents over time through interventions. Based on estimated response propensities, we examine the effectiveness of different re-issuing strategies using Representativity Indicators (R-indicators). We also combine information from the Receiver Operating Characteristic (ROC) curve with a cost function to determine an optimal cut point for the propensity not to respond in order to target interventions efficiently at cases least likely to respond. We use the first four waves of the UK Millennium Cohort Study to illustrate these methods. Our results suggest that it is worth re-issuing to the field nonresponding cases from previous waves although re-issuing refusals might not be the best use of resources. Adapting the sample to target subgroups for re-issuing from wave to wave will improve the representativeness of response. However, in situations where discrimination between respondents and nonrespondents is not strong, it is doubtful whether specific interventions to reduce nonresponse will be cost effective.
ISSN:0282-423X
2001-7367
2001-7367
DOI:10.1515/jos-2017-0035