Robert M. Groves and colleagues created a list of alternatives to the response rate as a measure of data quality. One of the alternatives that was mentioned in that article is the Fraction of Missing Information (FMI). I now have an article in POQ on the use of FMI as a measure of survey data quality.
One of the chapters in a recent book on surveying hard-to-reach populations looks at "targeting and tailoring" survey designs. The chapter references this paper on the use of the terms among those who design health communication. I thought the article was an interesting one. They start by saying that "one way to classify message strategies like tailoring is by the level of specificity with which characteristics of the target audience are reflected in the the communication." That made sense. There is likely a continuum of specificity ranging from complete non-differentiation across units to nearly individualized. But then the authors break that continuum and try to define a "fundamental" difference between tailoring and targeting. They say targeting is for some subgroup while tailoring is to the characteristics of the individual. That sounds good, but at least for surveys, I'm not sure the distinction holds. In survey design, what would constitute
Congrats! I look forward to reading.
ReplyDelete