1. Planning the change to a targeted survey design
Anton Örn Karlsson
August 31st 2017

2. Icelandic Labour Force Survey
Background:
Quarterly panel survey
3-2-2 rotation scheme
SRS from the national registry
CATI
Automatic and manual tracing of telephone numbers
Introductory letters
Mailed reminders
Fixed reference week
Three weeks of data collection
Average interview approx minutes
Shorter in later waves
Dependent interviewing
Experienced respondents

3. Quarterly response rates

4. Challenges Underrepresented groups Noncontact rate rising
Young people
21-40 years old
Other citizenships
Noncontact rate rising
Data collection budget

5. Opportunities Auxiliary variables are available from registers
Register based census was recently completed
Small and flexible NSI
Easy to test different interventions
Resources available for this project
High internet usage in Iceland – high ownership of smartphones

6. Targets Increased contact rate Decreased bias Increased response rate
Less than 5% noncontacts per quarter for each subgroup of the survey
Decreased bias
Less than 2% difference between respondents and non-respondents for key auxiliary variables
Apply a more effective weighting scheme
Increased response rate
Higher than 70% for all age groups per quarter
Higher than 60% for foreign citizens per quarter
This, in itself is a completely different focus than has been traditionally in the ISLFS where the main and only goal has been on maximizing the response rate of the survey.

7. The current plan
PDCA
Targeted introductory letters to younger sample units and foreign citizens in the sample (Lynn, 2016)
Call prioritization of younger sample units and foreign citizens, based on differing metrics, e.g. response propensities, expectent value of a case (Tourangeau, Brick, Lohr & Li, 2017)
Providing incentives to interviewers for contacting and interviewing cases with high prioritization (Peytchev, Riley, Rosen, Murphy & Lindblad, 2010)
Test different calling patterns for younger sample units and foreign citizens (Luiten & Schouten, 2013)
Use information gained from previous contacts in securing contact in a later wave of data collection
Call caps for high propensity cases (Beaumont, Bocci & Haziza, 2014)
Provide a web survey alternative for younger non-respondents
Possibly for foreign citizens?
Plan do check act -> very similar to what was presented yesterday from Statistics Canada on Active management: Planning, monitoring progress, timely analysis, communication and evaluation.
reminders? Or even questionnaire sending – secure addresses from other agencies, e.g. Tax authorities, national registry, customs, etc.
Further use of paradata… -> collect more paradata!

8. Questions? Comments?
Which type of indicator should Statistics Iceland focus on when changing its data collection scheme towards a more adaptive or targeted design?
We will monitor bias in unemployment benefits and income + noncontact rates
This is a culture change – any practical ideas?
Can some form of targeted survey design be used to increase the likelihood of contact with younger sample units?
Should Statistics perhaps rather focus on contact (e.g. by calculating contact propensities) rather than on response rates/response propensities?
Could the current plans of Statistics Iceland increase the effects of other error sources?
Are there any particular aspects (or indicators) that should be specially monitored, for example with regards to measurement error?
Re-calculating weights for the ISLFS
Re-calculated backwards in time?
Suitable methods?
Helpful metrics to use when new weighting models are developed?
Interesting discussions yesterday
Variance and weighting
Different models for different classes of nonresponse

9. Thank you!