Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Nonresponse Bias and Stimulus Effects in the Dutch National Election Study

  • Published:
Quality and Quantity Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Bias is a much-debated issue in survey research. Answer effects (respondents claim to have behaved differently than they did in reality), nonresponse bias (nonrespondents differ on important variables from the respondents) and stimulus effects (by participating in a previous wave of a study, respondents change their behavior or attitude) can seriously distort the results of survey research. By using data from the 1998 Dutch National Election Study the authors show that the results of election research can indeed be affected by bias. Not only are significant effects found in the distribution of political attitude and voting behavior variables as a result of both nonresponse bias and stimulus effects, it is also shown that relations between variables change as a result of bias.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Aarts, K, & Van der Kolk, H. (1999). Tegen de stroom in? Non-respons en Hawthorne effecten in het Nationaal Kiezersonderzoek 1998 (Against The Stream? Nonresponse and Hawthorne effects in the 1998 Dutch National Election Study). Paper presented at the NVMC Spring conference 'De Waan van de Dag', Utrecht, The Netherlands, April 23.

  • Aarts, K., Van der Kolk, H. & Kamp, M. (1999). Dutch Parliamentary Election Study 1998-Codebook. Enschede: Dutch Electoral Research Foundation (SKON).

    Google Scholar 

  • Andeweg, R. B. (1997). Institutional reform in Dutch politics: elected prime minister, personalized PR, and popular veto in comparative perspective. Acta Politica 32: 227-257.

    Google Scholar 

  • Andeweg, R. B. & Van Holsteyn, J. J. M. (1996). A hidden confidence gap? The question of nonresponse bias in measuring political interest. Netherlands Journal of Social Science 32: 127-142.

    Google Scholar 

  • Armstrong, J. S. & Overton, T. S. (1977). Estimating nonresponse bias in mail surveys. Journal of Marketing Research 14: 396-402.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bebbington, A. C. (1970). The effect of nonresponse in the sample survey with an example. Human Relations 23: 169-180.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Betlehem, J. G. & Kersten, H. M. P. (1986). Werken Met Nonresponse (Working With Nonresponse). Voorburg: Centraal Bureau voor de Statistiek.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bishop, G. F., Oldendick, R. W. & Tuchfarber, A. J. (1984). What must my interest in politics be if I just told you 'I don't know'?. Public Opinion Quarterly 48: 510-519.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Blalock Jr., H. M. (1960). Social Statistics. New York: McGraw-Hill.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bradburn, N. M. (1992). Presidential address; a response to the nonresponse problem. Public Opinion Quarterly 56: 391-397.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brehm, J. (1993). The Phantom Respondents; Opinion Surveys and Political Representation. Ann Arbor: University Of Michigan Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Burchell, B. & Marsh, C. (1992). The effect of questionnaire length on survey response. Quality & Quantity 26: 233-244.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Collins, M. & Sykes, W. (1987). The problems of non-coverage and unlisted numbers in telephone surveys in Britain. Journal of The Royal Statistical Society, series A 150: 241-253.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Couper, M. P. (1997). Survey introductions and data quality. Public Opinion Quarterly 61: 317-338.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Couper, M. P. & Groves, R. M. (1996). Social environmental impacts on survey cooperation. Quality & Quantity 30: 173-188.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • De Heer, W. (1999). International response trends: results of an international survey. Journal of Official Statistics 15: 129-142.

    Google Scholar 

  • De Leeuw, E. D. (1992). Data Quality in Mail, Telephone and Face to Face Surveys. Amsterdam: T.T.-Publikaties.

    Google Scholar 

  • DeMaio, T. J. (1980). Refusals: who, where and why. Public Opinion Quarterly 44: 223-233.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Donovan, R. J., Holman, C. D. J., Corti, B. & Jalleh, G. (1997). Face-to-face household interviews versus telephone interviews for health surveys. Australian and New Zealand Journal of Public Health 21: 134-140.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ellis, R. A., Endo C. M. & Armer, J. M. (1970). The use of potential nonrespondents for studying nonresponse bias. Pacific Sociological Review 13: 103-109.

    Google Scholar 

  • Filion, F. L. (1975). Estimating bias due to nonresponse in mail surveys. Public Opinion Quarterly 39: 482-492.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Filion, F. L. (1976). Exploring and correcting for nonresponse bias using follow-ups of nonrespondents. Pacific Sociological Review 19: 401-408.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fitzgerald, R. & Fuller, L. (1982). I hear you knocking but you can't come in. Sociological Methods & Research 11: 3-32.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Goudy, W. J. (1976). Nonresponse effects on relationships between variables. Public Opinion Quarterly 40: 360-369.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Goyder, J. (1987). The Silent Minority: Nonrespondents on Sample Surveys. Boulder: Westview Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Granberg, D. & Homberg, S. (1991). Self-reported turnout and voter validation. American Journal of Political Science 35: 448-459.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Greenwald, A., Carnot, C., Beach, R. & Young, B. (1987). Increasing voting behavior by asking people if they expect to vote. Journal of Applied Psychology 72: 315-318.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Groves, R. M. (1989). Survey Errors and Survey Costs. New York: Wiley.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Groves, R. M. & Couper, M. P. (1998). Nonresponse in Household Interview Surveys. New York: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Groves, R. M. & Kahn, R. L. (1979). Surveys by Telephone, A National Comparison with Personal Interviews. New York: Academic Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Groves, R. M. & Lyberg, L. E. (1988). An overview of nonresponse issues in telephone surveys. In: R. M. Groves, P. P. Biemer, L. E. Lyberg, J. T. Massey, W. L. Nicholls II & J. Waksberg (eds), Telephone Survey Methodology. New York: Wiley, pp. 191-212.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hawkins, D. F. (1975). Estimation of nonresponse bias. Sociological Methods & Research 3: 461-485.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Herzog, A. R. & Rodgers, W. L. (1988). Age and response rates to interview sample surveys. Journal of Gerontology 43: 200-205.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hochstim, J. R. (1967). A critical comparison of three strategies of collecting data from households. Journal of The American Statistical Association 62: 976-989.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hox, J. H. & De Leeuw, E. D. (1994). A comparison of nonresponse in mail, telephone, and face-to-face surveys. Quality & Quantity 28: 329-344.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lagay, B. W. (1969). Assessing bias: a comparison of two methods. Public Opinion Quarterly 33: 615-618.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lin, I. F. & Schaeffer, N. C. (1995). Using survey participants to estimate the impact of nonparticipation. Public Opinion Quarterly 59: 236-258.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Locander, W., Sudman, S. & Bradburn, N. (1976). An investigation of interview method, threat and response distortion. Journal of The American Statistical Association 71: 269-275.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lund, E. & Gram, I. T. (1998). Response rate according to title and length of questionnaire. Scandinavian Journal of Social Medicine 26: 154-160.

    Google Scholar 

  • O'Neil, M. J. (1979). Estimating the nonresponse bias due to refusals in telephone surveys. Public Opinion Quarterly 43: 218-232.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pavalko, R. & Lutterman, K. G. (1973). Characteristics of willing and reluctant respondents. Pacific Sociological Review 16: 463-476.

    Google Scholar 

  • Perry, J. B., Jr. (1968). A note on the use of telephone directories as a sample source. Public Opinion Quarterly 32: 691-695.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rich, C. L. (1977). Is random digit dialing really necessary?. Journal of Marketing Research 14: 300-305.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Saris, W. E. & Van Den Putte, B. (1988). True score or factor models-a secondary analysis of the ALLBUS-Test-Retest data. Sociological Methods and Research 17: 123-157.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Saris, W. E. & Hagenaars, J. A. (1997). Mode effects in the standard Eurobarometer questions. In: W. E. Saris & M. Kaase (eds), Eurobarometer-Measurement Instruments for Opinions in Europe. Mannheim: ZUMA, pp. 87-100.

    Google Scholar 

  • Smeets, I. (1995). Facing another gap: an exploration of the discrepancies between voting turnout in survey research and official statistics. Acta Politica 30: 307-334.

    Google Scholar 

  • Smith, T. W. (1983). The hidden 25 percent: an analysis of nonresponse on the 1980 General Social Survey. Public Opinion Quarterly 47: 386-404.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Smith, T. W. (1984). Estimating nonresponse bias with temporary refusals. Sociological Perspectives 27: 473-489.

    Google Scholar 

  • Smith, T. W. (1990). Phone home? An analysis of household telephone ownership. International Journal of Public Opinion Research 2: 369-390.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Steeh, C. G. (1981). Trends in nonresponse rates, 1952-1979. Public Opinion Quarterly 45: 40-57.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stinchcombe, A. L., Jones, C. & Sheatsley, P. (1981). Nonresponse bias for attitude questions. Public Opinion Quarterly 45: 359-375.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Swaddle, K. & Heath, A. (1989). Official and reported turnout in the British General Election of 1987. British Journal of Political Science 19: 527-541.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sykes, W. & Collins, M. (1988). Effects of mode of interview: experiments in the UK. In: R. M. Groves, P. P. Biemer, L. E. Lyberg, J. T. Massey, W. L. Nicholls II & J. Waksberg (eds), Telephone Survey Methodology. New York: Wiley, pp. 301-320.

    Google Scholar 

  • Traugott, M. W. & Katosh, J. P. (1979). Response validity in surveys of voting behavior. Public Opinion Quarterly 42: 359-377.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Van Goor, B. (1996). Het lijk uit de kast: non-respons in het Nationaal Kiezersonderzoek (The corpse in the cupboard: nonresponse in the National Election Study). Sociologische Gids 18: 166-170.

    Google Scholar 

  • Visscher, G. (1995). Kiezersonderzoek op een Dwaalspoor (Election Studies on the Wrong Track) Den Haag: SDU.

  • Voogt, R. J. J., Saris, W. E. & Niemöller, B. (1998). Non-response, and the gulf between the public and the politicians. Acta Politica 33: 250-280.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wilcox, J. B. (1977). The interaction of refusal and not-at-home sources of nonresponse bias. Journal of Marketing Research 14: 592-597.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wolfle, L. M. (1979). Characteristics of persons with and without home telephones. Journal of Marketing Research 16: 421-425.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yalch, R. F. (1976). Pre-election interview effects on voter turnout. Public Opinion Quarterly 40: 331-336.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. ASCOR/University Of Amsterdam, Oude Hoogstraat 24, 1012 CE, Amsterdam, The Netherlands

    Robert J. J. Voogt

  2. ASCOR/University Of Amsterdam, Oude Hoogstraat 24, 1012 CE, Amsterdam, The Netherlands

    Hetty Van Kempen

Authors
  1. Robert J. J. Voogt
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Hetty Van Kempen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Robert J. J. Voogt.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Voogt, R.J.J., Van Kempen, H. Nonresponse Bias and Stimulus Effects in the Dutch National Election Study. Quality & Quantity 36, 325–345 (2002). https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1020966227669

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1020966227669

Search

Navigation