Guide for Investigators. The American Panel Survey (TAPS)

Similar documents
The American Panel Survey. Study Description and Technical Report Public Release 1 November 2013

CCES 2014 Methods and Survey Procedures

Results from the 2009 Virgin Islands Health Insurance Survey

Original data included. The datasets harmonised are:

Survey Information and Methodology. Introduction

THE VALUE OF AN INVESTMENT & INSURANCE CUSTOMER TO A BANK

1 PEW RESEARCH CENTER

The August 2018 AP-NORC Center Poll

THE IMPACT OF INTERGENERATIONAL WEALTH ON RETIREMENT

1 PEW RESEARCH CENTER

Benchmark Report for the 2008 American National Election Studies Time Series and Panel Study. ANES Technical Report Series, no. NES

How Couples Meet and Stay Together Project

2019 Colorado Health Access Survey (CHAS) Survey Administrator Request for Proposal (RFP) April 2018

PERCEPTIONS OF EXTREME WEATHER AND CLIMATE CHANGE IN VIRGINIA

Table 1. Underinsured Indicators Among Adults Ages Insured All Year, 2003, 2005, 2010, 2012, 2014, 2016

Health Insurance Coverage in Massachusetts: Results from the Massachusetts Health Insurance Surveys

GLOBAL WARMING NATIONAL POLL RESOURCES FOR THE FUTURE NEW YORK TIMES STANFORD UNIVERSITY. Conducted by SSRS

Introduction to Survey Weights for National Adult Tobacco Survey. Sean Hu, MD., MS., DrPH. Office on Smoking and Health

Comparative Study of Electoral Systems (CSES) Module 4: Design Report (Sample Design and Data Collection Report) September 10, 2012

Comparative Study of Electoral Systems (CSES) Module 4: Design Report (Sample Design and Data Collection Report) September 10, 2012

Health Insurance Coverage in Oklahoma: 2008

Employer-sponsored Health Insurance among Small Businesses: The 2000 California HealthCare Foundation/Mercer Survey

National Financial Well- Being Survey

Central Statistical Bureau of Latvia FINAL QUALITY REPORT RELATING TO EU-SILC OPERATIONS

Notes On Weights, Produced by Knowledge Networks, Amended by the Stanford Research Team, Applicable to Version 2.0 of the data.

The December 2017 AP-NORC Center Poll

BZComparative Study of Electoral Systems (CSES) Module 3: Sample Design and Data Collection Report June 05, 2006

USE OF AN EXISTING SAMPLING FRAME TO COLLECT BROAD-BASED HEALTH AND HEALTH- RELATED DATA AT THE STATE AND LOCAL LEVEL

ASSOCIATED PRESS-LIFEGOESSTRONG.COM BOOMERS SURVEY OCTOBER 2011 CONDUCTED BY KNOWLEDGE NETWORKS October 14, 2011

Survey Project & Profile

The coverage of young children in demographic surveys

Survey Methodology Overview 2016 Central Minnesota Community Health Survey Benton, Sherburne, & Stearns Counties

NANOS SURVEY. Canadians divided on changes to tax treatment of private corporations NANOS SURVEY

Public Attitudes Toward Social Security and Private Accounts

Fact Sheet. Health Insurance Coverage in Minnesota, Early Results from the 2009 Minnesota Health Access Survey. February, 2010

Appendix A: Detailed Methodology and Statistical Methods

Americans' Views on Healthcare Costs, Coverage and Policy

This document provides additional information on the survey, its respondents, and the variables

Final Quality report for the Swedish EU-SILC. The longitudinal component

Thanksgiving, the Economy, & Consumer Behavior November 15-18, 2013

Final Quality report for the Swedish EU-SILC. The longitudinal component. (Version 2)

Fact Sheet March, 2012

CONSUMPTION POVERTY IN THE REPUBLIC OF KOSOVO April 2017

PART B Details of ICT collections

Tables Describing the Asset and Vehicle Holdings of Low-Income Households in 2002

Impressions of Canadians on US Election and presidential candidates. National survey released November 2016 Project NANOS SURVEY

HEALTH AND RETIREMENT STUDY Prescription Drug Study Final Release V1.0, November 2008 (Sensitive Health Data) Data Description and Usage

Q. Which company delivers your electricity?

PPI ALERT November 2011

Technical Report Series

Central Statistical Bureau of Latvia INTERMEDIATE QUALITY REPORT EU-SILC 2011 OPERATION IN LATVIA

Bulgaria - Integrated Household Survey 2001

Technical Report for the 2011 Minnesota Health Access Survey: Survey Methodology, Weighting and Data Editing

Survey of Household Economics and Decisionmaking

CYPRUS FINAL QUALITY REPORT

Health Insurance Coverage in the District of Columbia

ASSOCIATED PRESS-LIFEGOESSTRONG.COM BOOMERS SURVEY CONDUCTED BY KNOWLEDGE NETWORKS March 16, 2011

Issue Brief. Does Medicaid Make a Difference? The COMMONWEALTH FUND. Findings from the Commonwealth Fund Biennial Health Insurance Survey, 2014

By Paul Fronstin, Ph.D., Employee Benefit Research Institute; and Edna Dretzka, Greenwald & Associates A T A G L A N C E

CRP 566 DEMOGRAPHIC ANALYSIS INTRODUCTION. Dave Swenson Department of Economics College of Agriculture and Life Sciences Iowa State University

Survey Design Third Party Monitoring and Evaluation (M&E) of UNICEF s Unconditional Cash Transfer Program

The Best of Both Worlds: A Sampling Frame Based on Address-Based Sampling and Field Enumeration

Income and resource provisions

National survey released May, 2018 Project

Using a Dual-Frame Sample Design to Increase the Efficiency of Reaching Population Subgroups in a Telephone Survey

Survey Methodology. Methodology Wave 1. Fall 2016 City of Detroit. Detroit Metropolitan Area Communities Study [1]

Views on Canada s role in peacekeeping missions. National survey released October, 2016 Project NANOS SURVEY NANOS SURVEY

Intermediate Quality Report for the Swedish EU-SILC, The 2007 cross-sectional component

PROBABILITY BASED INTERNET SURVEYS: A SYNOPSIS OF EARLY METHODS AND SURVEY RESEARCH RESULTS 1

Comparative Study of Electoral Systems (CSES) Module 4: Design Report (Sample Design and Data Collection Report) September 10, 2012

Norwegian Citizen Panel

Are Canadians ready for their retirement?

Employer Survey Design and Planning Report. February 2013 Washington, D.C.

Canadians opinions on the impact of international trade agreements on the Canadian economy Nanos Trade Survey Summary

EBRI Databook on Employee Benefits Appendix D: Explanation of Sources

Poverty and Labor Force Statistics in the United States

2014 Travel Like a Local Summer Travel Survey

A majority of Canadians would look favourably or somewhat favourably on politicians who defend Canada s dairy sector in NAFTA negotiations

CYPRUS FINAL QUALITY REPORT

Health Status, Health Insurance, and Health Services Utilization: 2001

GTSS. Global Adult Tobacco Survey (GATS) Sample Weights Manual

NJ SPOTLIGHT ON CITIES 2016 CONFERENCE SPECIAL:

HEALTH AND RETIREMENT STUDY Prescription Drug Study Final Release V1.0, March 2011 (Sensitive Health Data) Data Description and Usage

Canadians opinions on possible key priorities for the federal budget National survey released February 2016 Project NANOS SURVEY NANOS SURVEY

Press Release. Is America Great Yet? Ipsos Poll

PCs 41, Liberals 29, NDP 24, Greens 6 in latest Nanos Ontario tracking. Nanos Tracking, May 2018 (released May 11 th, 2018) NANOS

Massachusetts Household Survey on Health Insurance Status, 2007

Children's Health Coverage in Mississippi, CPS /27/2010. Center for Mississippi Health Policy

Nepal Living Standards Survey III 2010 Sampling design and implementation

No K. Swartz The Urban Institute

Fact Sheet. Health Insurance Coverage in Minnesota, 2001 vs February Changes in Health Insurance Coverage and Uninsurance

A Profile of the Working Poor, 2011

Norwegian Citizen Panel

PHASING INTO RETIREMENT: OLDER AMERICANS EXPERIENCES WITH WORK AND RETIREMENT PLANNING

CYPRUS FINAL QUALITY REPORT

1 Preface. Sample Design

Harris Interactive. ACEP Emergency Care Poll

Balancing Cross-sectional and Longitudinal Design Objectives for the Survey of Doctorate Recipients

Medical Expenditure Panel Survey. Household Component Statistical Estimation Issues. Copyright 2007, Steven R. Machlin,

Response Mode and Bias Analysis in the IRS Individual Taxpayer Burden Survey

Transcription:

Draft (to be updated in January) Guide for Investigators The American Panel Survey (TAPS) Weidenbaum Center Washington University Steven S. Smith, Director About The American Panel Survey (TAPS) TAPS is a monthly online survey of a national probability sample of about 2,000 adults in the United States. A variety of social science investigators use the panel. Most studies concern the economic and political attitudes and behavior of the American public. The panel was recruited in May July, 2011, using an address based sampling (ABS) frame. That is, from a random selection of residential addresses, stratified using ancillary data on age and ethnic group, a panel of 2,000 was recruited. TAPS surveys are administered online; selected panelists who do not have a computer or on line service are provided access by TAPS. TAPS surveys are conducted for the Weidenbaum Center by Knowledge Networks, a leading online survey research firm located in Palo Alto, California. The panel results in a minimum of 1,550 completed interviews per month. Instrument Design The director of TAPS, in consultation with other scholars, has established a battery of demographic and other questions that are asked of all panelists. In addition, a large set of recurring questions is asked about economic and political subjects. The schedule for recurring questions some monthly, some less frequently is provided in the Recurring Questions section below. In addition to recurring questions, research modules of up to 15 minutes may be placed on each month s survey. The TAPS director works with investigators to schedule research modules taking into account research needs and the necessity of maintaining the panel. Prices (July 1, 2011 June 30, 2012) Base Fees. The base prices for a research module are based on significant fixed costs and additional costs associated with the length of the survey. Fixed costs included the recruitment and maintenance of the panel, staffing costs at Knowledge Networks and the Weidenbaum Center, the accumulation of background data on panelists, participation incentives for panelists, use of the mail and telephone to 1

prompt panelists, and data management. The length of survey affects programming and staff time, data and codebook preparation, and the limited resource of access to panelists. Fee Schedule, July 1, 2011 June 30, 2012 Survey Length Fee 5 minutes or less $49,333.00 10 minutes 61,667.00 15 minutes 74,000.00 20 minutes 86,333.00 Fees for surveys of other lengths are prorated according to these fees. Base fees include the following deliverables: Data in a standard format (STATA, SPSS, Excel), a codebook in Word, weights, and documentation on sample details. Background Data. The base fees include up to 15 variables of demographic and other variables (value of approximately $12,000). TAPS has data on all 15 variables for nearly all panelists. The selection of background variables is listed in Background Variables below. Data from Previous Surveys. Responses to questions asked in previous surveys are available when the data are not committed to other investigators. TAPS cannot guarantee that data are available for all panelists on all questions. The price per question is $750. Panel Designs. TAPS has a panel design that should be exploited by investigators. The base prices apply to both cross sectional and panel designs. For example, a fiveminute battery of questions that is repeated at four different times is a 20 minute survey. Special Fees. The TAPS director works with investigators to establish prices for projects that require special programming or other staff support, such as projects that involve streaming media. Pre Proposals and Proposals for Research Modules Investigators should submit pre proposals for research modules to the TAPS director as early as possible, but no later than 6 months before they hope to be in the field. A pre proposal should be 3 4 single spaced pages and include (a) a statement of the importance of the work, (b) the major hypotheses, (c) a discussion of the number 2

and type of questions that are expected to be used, and (d) a proposed date for the survey(s). A successful pre proposal review will result in a request for a longer proposal that includes a draft questionnaire. Research modules will be scheduled to account for several considerations: The purposes of the research, other TAPS research modules and priorities, and panel maintenance. Investigators Responsibilities Each investigator is responsible for the following steps in the research process 1. successful completion of the IRB process required by a funding agency or home university at least one month before the scheduled survey (documentation must be provided); 2. delivery of a draft questionnaire to the TAPS director at least six weeks before the scheduled survey; 3. analysis of pre test data; 4. revision of the questionnaire and approval of the TAPS director at least four weeks before the scheduled survey; 5. half payment of the fees at least two weeks before the scheduled survey; 6. full payment of the fees within one month following delivery of data and codebook. Sampling Methodology and Recruitment The sample of addresses is drawn from the U.S. Postal Service s computerized delivery sequence file (CDSF). The CDSF covers some 97% of the physical addresses in all 50 states including P.O. boxes and rural route addresses. Homes that are vacant or seasonal are identified as are other categories that help to refine the efficiency of the sample to be mailed. Using data from available U.S. Census files plus from a variety of commercial data bases, such as White Pages, Experian, Acxiom, etc., MSG can add names to these addresses, match with landline telephone numbers, and with some level of accuracy tag on information regarding race/ethnicity, age of householder, whether there are people of a certain age in the household, presence of children, home ownership status, etc. Based on recent experience with the recruitment of an online panel with the ABS frame, TAPS strata are designed to specifically break out young adults (ages 18 24) 3

and Hispanics, in addition to the balance of the population. Young adults and Hispanics may be strategically oversampled because these groups have a tendency to under respond to surveys. Four mutually exclusive strata are used: 1. 18 24 year old Hispanic adults 2. All other Hispanic adults ages 25+ or age unknown 3. 18 24 year old non Hispanic adults 4. All other adults that are non Hispanic or ethnicity unknown and ages 25+ or age unknown The estimated yield from each of the above strata is 5.6%, 6.4%, 14.4% and 9.4%, respectively [actual yields to be updated in September]. Within household selection procedures vary by the mode in which the household responds to the initial contact. Details are available upon request. A successful recruitment is counted only when a Profile Survey is completed. The resulting sample design and expected outcome is as follows [to be updated in September]: Stratum A. Mailing B. Yields C. Profiled D. Strata Distributions count distribution proportion count proportion count sample frame 1 Hispanic 18 24 333 1.0% 0.056 19 0.65 12 0.6% 0.2% 2 Hispanic 25+/unk 6,943 19.9% 0.064 445 0.65 289 14.4% 14.1% 3 Other 18 24 469 1.3% 0.144 68 0.65 44 2.2% 0.7% 4 All Else 25+/unk 27,071 77.8% 0.094 2,550 0.65 1,657 82.8% 85.0% Overall 34,816 3,081 2,003 100.0% 100.0% TAPS will recruit additional sample in later years to maintain the panel size of 2,000 U.S. adult English speaking members as some members leave the panel. Replacement recruiting will be conducted using the same methods as the original panel. A schedule for replacement recruiting is available upon request. Sample Features A panel of about 2,000 English speaking adults in the U.S. has been created. We estimate that approximately 80% of the TAPS Panel (1,600) will complete each TAPS wave during the first year and 75% will complete each survey in the second and subsequent years. TAPS will provide a minimum of 1,550 completes per wave with a minimum of three weeks in the field. The TAPS Panel is closely matched to the CPS estimates of the American population on key demographic characteristics, as show in the table below. 4

Weighting TAPS calculates weights to make survey results generalizable to the U.S. population of English speaking adults. Investigators will receive these weights as variables in delivered data files. Adjustments are made to compensate for (a) selection probabilities altered by the stratified sample design and (b) within household selection probabilities associated with the random choice of a panel member from among all eligible adults residing in the household. These adjustments constitute the base weight that corrects the sample to approximate a simple random sample of the population of adults. The following weight, w1 i k, for mailing addresses i within stratum k is calculated as follows: where w1 i k = (P i k / P tot ) (S tot / S i k ) P i k is the population or frame count within stratum k, P tot is the total population count from the frame, S i k is the sample count within stratum k, and S tot is the total recruited sample size. We also adjust for the selection probability of the randomly selected adult within households. To adjust for this, we weight each selected respondent, r, by the inverse of the number of eligible adults, A, ages 18 and older, enumerated as residing in household, h, and call this w2 r h and calculate as follows: w2 r h = A h / 1 The base weight is the product of w1 i k and w2 r h. 1 The TAPS director can provide an estimate of design effects upon request. Investigators may choose to use the estimated design effect to adjust standard errors in statistical estimates. 1 An additional adjustment will be made for our follow up efforts to recruit panelists by telephone after an initial nonresponse. Households recruited based on the telephone follow up may over represent addresses in the sample with a successful telephone match. Based on the natural match rate in the sample, recruited households from the telephone recruitment will be weighted downward appropriately. 5

Background Variables 1. age 2. sex 3. race/ethnicity 4. marital status 5. religion 6. religious service attendance 7. education 8. employed 9. occupation 10. citizenship 11. household income 12. personal income 13. home ownership 14. ideological self identification 15. party identification IRB Review The Washington University IRB process has been completed for core features of TAPS. TAPS is given an exempt status as a survey project on which the identifiers are not provided to the TAPS director or investigators and proper protocols to acquire informed consent and preserve confidentiality are in place. Upon request, the TAPS director can provide information that may be useful to investigators who must complete IRB review for funding agencies and home universities. 6