Using Social Networks to Supplement RDD Telephone Surveys to Oversample Hard-to-Reach Populations: A New RDD+RDS Approach

IF 2.4 2区 社会学 Q1 SOCIOLOGY Sociological Methodology Pub Date : 2021-04-22 DOI:10.1177/00811750211003922
R. Agans, D. Zeng, B. Shook‐Sa, Marcella H. Boynton, N. Brewer, E. Sutfin, A. Goldstein, S. Noar, Q. Vallejos, Tara L Queen, J. Bowling, K. Ribisl
{"title":"Using Social Networks to Supplement RDD Telephone Surveys to Oversample Hard-to-Reach Populations: A New RDD+RDS Approach","authors":"R. Agans, D. Zeng, B. Shook‐Sa, Marcella H. Boynton, N. Brewer, E. Sutfin, A. Goldstein, S. Noar, Q. Vallejos, Tara L Queen, J. Bowling, K. Ribisl","doi":"10.1177/00811750211003922","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Random digit dialing (RDD) telephone sampling, although experiencing declining response rates, remains one of the most accurate and cost-effective data collection methods for generating national population-based estimates. Such methods, however, are inefficient when sampling hard-to-reach populations because the costs of recruiting sufficient sample sizes to produce reliable estimates tend to be cost prohibitive. The authors implemented a novel respondent-driven sampling (RDS) approach to oversample cigarette smokers and lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) people. The new methodology selects RDS referrals or seeds from a probability-based RDD sampling frame and treats the social networks as clusters in the weighting and analysis, thus eliminating the intricate assumptions of RDS. The authors refer to this approach as RDD+RDS. In 2016 and 2017, a telephone survey was conducted on tobacco-related topics with a national sample of 4,208 U.S. adults, as well as 756 referral-based respondents. The RDD+RDS estimates were comparable with stand-alone RDD estimates, suggesting that the addition of RDS responses from social networks improved the precision of the estimates without introducing significant bias. The authors also conducted an experiment to determine whether the number of recruits would vary on the basis of how the RDS recruitment question specified the recruitment population (closeness of relationship, time since last contact, and LGBT vs. tobacco user), and significant differences were found in the number of referrals provided on the basis of question wording. The RDD+RDS sampling approach, as an adaptation of standard RDD methodology, is a practical tool for survey methodologists that provides an efficient strategy for oversampling rare or elusive populations.","PeriodicalId":48140,"journal":{"name":"Sociological Methodology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.4000,"publicationDate":"2021-04-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1177/00811750211003922","citationCount":"4","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Sociological Methodology","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/00811750211003922","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"SOCIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 4

Abstract

Random digit dialing (RDD) telephone sampling, although experiencing declining response rates, remains one of the most accurate and cost-effective data collection methods for generating national population-based estimates. Such methods, however, are inefficient when sampling hard-to-reach populations because the costs of recruiting sufficient sample sizes to produce reliable estimates tend to be cost prohibitive. The authors implemented a novel respondent-driven sampling (RDS) approach to oversample cigarette smokers and lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) people. The new methodology selects RDS referrals or seeds from a probability-based RDD sampling frame and treats the social networks as clusters in the weighting and analysis, thus eliminating the intricate assumptions of RDS. The authors refer to this approach as RDD+RDS. In 2016 and 2017, a telephone survey was conducted on tobacco-related topics with a national sample of 4,208 U.S. adults, as well as 756 referral-based respondents. The RDD+RDS estimates were comparable with stand-alone RDD estimates, suggesting that the addition of RDS responses from social networks improved the precision of the estimates without introducing significant bias. The authors also conducted an experiment to determine whether the number of recruits would vary on the basis of how the RDS recruitment question specified the recruitment population (closeness of relationship, time since last contact, and LGBT vs. tobacco user), and significant differences were found in the number of referrals provided on the basis of question wording. The RDD+RDS sampling approach, as an adaptation of standard RDD methodology, is a practical tool for survey methodologists that provides an efficient strategy for oversampling rare or elusive populations.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
利用社会网络补充RDD电话调查对难以接触到的人群进行抽样:一种新的RDD+RDS方法
随机数字拨号(RDD)电话抽样虽然回复率正在下降,但仍然是最准确和最具成本效益的数据收集方法之一,用于产生基于全国人口的估计数。然而,当对难以接触到的人口进行抽样时,这种方法是低效的,因为招募足够的样本量以产生可靠的估计所需的费用往往高得令人望而却步。作者采用了一种新颖的受访者驱动抽样(RDS)方法对吸烟者和女同性恋、男同性恋、双性恋和变性人(LGBT)进行抽样。新方法从基于概率的RDD采样框架中选择RDS引荐或种子,并将社会网络作为聚类进行加权和分析,从而消除了RDS的复杂假设。作者将这种方法称为RDD+RDS。2016年和2017年,对全国4208名美国成年人以及756名转诊受访者进行了一项关于烟草相关话题的电话调查。RDD+RDS估计值与单独的RDD估计值具有可比性,这表明来自社交网络的RDS反应的增加提高了估计值的精度,而不会引入明显的偏差。作者还进行了一项实验,以确定招募人数是否会根据RDS招募问题对招募人群(关系亲密程度,上次联系时间,LGBT与吸烟者)的指定方式而变化,并发现根据问题措辞提供的推荐数量存在显着差异。RDD+RDS抽样方法是对标准RDD方法的改进,是一种实用的调查方法,为罕见或难以捉摸的群体提供了一种有效的过抽样策略。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.50
自引率
0.00%
发文量
12
期刊介绍: Sociological Methodology is a compendium of new and sometimes controversial advances in social science methodology. Contributions come from diverse areas and have something useful -- and often surprising -- to say about a wide range of topics ranging from legal and ethical issues surrounding data collection to the methodology of theory construction. In short, Sociological Methodology holds something of value -- and an interesting mix of lively controversy, too -- for nearly everyone who participates in the enterprise of sociological research.
期刊最新文献
Contextual Embeddings in Sociological Research: Expanding the Analysis of Sentiment and Social Dynamics Using Relative Distribution Methods to Study Economic Polarization across Categories and Contexts Can Human Reading Validate a Topic Model? Question-Order Effect in the Study of Satisfaction with Democracy: Lessons from Three Split-Ballot Experiments Comparing the Robustness of Simple Network Scale-Up Method Estimators
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1