SSOAR Logo
    • Deutsch
    • English
  • English 
    • Deutsch
    • English
  • Login
SSOAR ▼
  • Home
  • About SSOAR
  • Guidelines
  • Publishing in SSOAR
  • Cooperating with SSOAR
    • Cooperation models
    • Delivery routes and formats
    • Projects
  • Cooperation partners
    • Information about cooperation partners
  • Information
    • Possibilities of taking the Green Road
    • Grant of Licences
    • Download additional information
  • Operational concept
Browse and search Add new document OAI-PMH interface
JavaScript is disabled for your browser. Some features of this site may not work without it.

Download PDF
Download full text

(external source)

Citation Suggestion

Please use the following Persistent Identifier (PID) to cite this document:
https://doi.org/10.18148/srm/2019.v13i3.7375

Exports for your reference manager

Bibtex export
Endnote export

Display Statistics
Share
  • Share via E-Mail E-Mail
  • Share via Facebook Facebook
  • Share via Bluesky Bluesky
  • Share via Reddit reddit
  • Share via Linkedin LinkedIn
  • Share via XING XING

In Search of the Optimal Mode for Mobile Phone Surveys in Developing Countries: A Comparison of IVR, SMS, and CATI in Nigeria

[journal article]

Lau, Charles Q.
Cronberg, Alexandra
Marks, Leenisha
Amaya, Ashley

Abstract

Mobile phone surveys are increasingly prevalent in low- and middle-income countries. The main modes include computer-assisted telephone interviewing (CATI), interactive voice response (IVR), and short message service (SMS, or text messaging). But there is surprisingly little research to guide resear... view more

Mobile phone surveys are increasingly prevalent in low- and middle-income countries. The main modes include computer-assisted telephone interviewing (CATI), interactive voice response (IVR), and short message service (SMS, or text messaging). But there is surprisingly little research to guide researchers in selecting the optimal mode for a particular survey. To address this gap, this study compares cross-sectional CATI, IVR, SMS, and face-to-face (FTF) surveys of the general population in Nigeria. We ask four research questions: (1) What are production and response rates to CATI, IVR, SMS, and FTF surveys? (2) How representative (age, gender, education, marital status, literacy, household assets, urbanicity) are CATI, IVR, and SMS respondents relative to FTF respondents? (3) Can IVR and SMS provide an unbiased estimate of voting behavior? If there is bias, to what extent can weights reduce bias? (4) How does the cost and time differ across mobile phone survey modes? We find that FTF had the highest response rate (99%), followed by CATI (15%), IVR (3%) and SMS (0.2%). All mobile phone modes had substantial deficiencies with representativeness: mobile phones underrepresented women, older people, the less educated, and people in rural areas. There were differences in representativeness among mobile phone modes, but differences were relatively small and inconsistent. Both SMS and IVR produced biased estimates of voting relative to official statistics – but SMS was less biased than IVR. Weighting SMS and IVR data for demographic characteristics did not reduce bias. With regard to cost, we find that CATI is the most expensive mobile phone survey mode. For a survey of 3,000 completes, IVR is 43% the cost of CATI, and SMS is 24% the cost of CATI. SMS is significantly less expensive than IVR. We discuss the implications of these results for research and practice.... view less

Keywords
survey research; cell phone; survey; developing country; Nigeria; Africa; computer-assisted telephone interview; SMS; interview; representativity; comparison; data capture; data quality; response behavior

Classification
Methods and Techniques of Data Collection and Data Analysis, Statistical Methods, Computer Methods

Free Keywords
IVR; mode

Document language
English

Publication Year
2019

Page/Pages
p. 305-318

Journal
Survey Research Methods, 13 (2019) 3

ISSN
1864-3361

Status
Published Version; peer reviewed

Licence
Deposit Licence - No Redistribution, No Modifications


GESIS LogoDFG LogoOpen Access Logo
Home  |  Legal notices  |  Operational concept  |  Privacy policy
© 2007 - 2025 Social Science Open Access Repository (SSOAR).
Based on DSpace, Copyright (c) 2002-2022, DuraSpace. All rights reserved.
 

 


GESIS LogoDFG LogoOpen Access Logo
Home  |  Legal notices  |  Operational concept  |  Privacy policy
© 2007 - 2025 Social Science Open Access Repository (SSOAR).
Based on DSpace, Copyright (c) 2002-2022, DuraSpace. All rights reserved.