Technical Appendix to NCHRP Report 571: Standardized Procedures for Personal Travel Surveys (2007) / Chapter Skim
Currently Skimming:
Pages 45-53
The Chapter Skim interface presents what we've algorithmically identified as the most significant single chunk of text within every page in the chapter.
Select key terms on the right to highlight them within pages of the chapter.
From page 45... ...
39 CHAPTER 3 3. Identification and Categorization of Potential Procedures and Assessment Measures 3.1 APPROACH This chapter discusses specifically which aspects of the survey procedure and which measures of assessment of the survey were considered to have potential for standardization.
|
From page 46... ...
40 3.2 EVALUATION OF POTENTIAL AREAS FOR STANDARDIZATION In this section, the potential areas for standardization are summarized, categorized, and evaluated. The evaluation includes an assessment of the level of effort required to implement the standardized procedure, the potential benefits, the expected costs of implementation, and whether a field test was considered necessary or not.
|
From page 47... ...
41 3.2.1 Categories of Classification The aim of the second task in this project was not only to elaborate on the list of potential procedures and assessment measures for standardization, but also to categorize these into whether a standard was ready for immediate implementation, whether it could be researched sufficiently to adopt as a standard within the time and budget available, or that it was beyond the scope of this project. However, as the categories were considered it became apparent that there were issues and assessment measures where part of it was categorized at one level and part at another level.
|
From page 48... ...
42 • The ease with which the assessment measure may be applied; • The clarity of the assessment measure; • The universality of the assessment measure; and • The criticality of the assessment measure. The procedures and assessment measures identified in this study were assessed on the above criteria using a numeric weighting-and-rating process to provide a single index of assessment.
|
From page 49... ...
43 Ref Item Category Effort Req. Potential Benefits Expected Costs Fieldwork Required Importance I-2 Standardization of Categories In this project Low Comparability Usefulness Reliability Quality Clarity None No Very High I-3 Collection of InHome Activities In this project Medium Comparability Completeness Usefulness Quality Low Yes Low I-4 Ordering of Questions In this project Medium Quality Reliability None Yes Low I-5 Standard Question Wordings In this project Medium Quality Clarity Usefulness Reliability Comparability None Yes Very High I-6 Instrument Design In this project/ Beyond scope Medium to High Quality Clarity Usefulness Comparability Low Yes in future work High I-7 Multi-Tasking of Activities In this project/Beyond scope Medium to High Usefulness Comparability Completeness Quality Reliability Low Yes in future work Low I-8 SP Data Beyond Scope High Comparability Quality Clarity Usefulness Reliability Low to Medium Yes in future work Low Design of Data Collection Procedures D-1 Number and Type of Contacts In this project/Beyond scope Medium Cost Effectiveness Quality Reliability Low to Medium3 Yes Low D-2 Who Should be Surveyed In this project Medium Comparability Usefulness Quality Low No Medium D-3 Proxy Reporting In this project Medium Cost Effectiveness Quality Completeness Reliability Usefulness Comparability Measure of Quality Low to Medium Yes High D-4 Complete Household Definition In this project Medium Quality Cost Effectiveness Clarity Completeness Comparability Measure of Quality Usefulness Medium No Very High D-5 Classification of Contact Outcomes In this project Low Comparability Measure of Quality None No Medium D-6 Sample Replacement In this project Medium Cost Effectiveness Quality Measure of Quality Low No High 3 This is an instance where an increase in unit costs should lead to an overall decrease in survey costs.
|
From page 50... ...
44 Ref Item Category Effort Req. Potential Benefits Expected Costs Fieldwork Required Importance Comparability Reliability D-7 Item Nonresponse In this project Medium Quality Cost Effectiveness Comparability Reliability Measure of Quality Low Yes Low D-8 Unit Nonresponse In this project/Beyond scope Medium Quality Comparability Reliability Cost Effectiveness Low Yes Low D-9 Times of Day for Contacts In this project Medium Quality Comparability None to Low No Low D-10 Initial Contacts In this project Medium Quality Comparability Cost Effectiveness None to Low Maybe Medium D-11 GPS Surveys Beyond Scope Medium to High Comparability Quality Cost Effectiveness Medium Yes Low D-12 Internet Surveys Beyond Scope Medium to High Quality Comparability Cost Effectiveness Medium Yes Low D-13 Incentives In this project/Beyond scope Low Quality Cost Effectiveness Reliability Low to Medium Yes Low Sample Design S-1 Sample Size In this project Medium to High Cost Effectiveness Comparability Reliability Quality Usefulness None4 No Medium S-2 Sizes and Procedures for Augment Samples In this project Medium Comparability Quality Usefulness None5 No Medium S-3 Collecting Augment Samples In this project/Beyond scope Medium to High Quality Completeness Usefulness Comparability None6 No Low S-4 Stratification Options In this project Medium to High Cost Effectiveness Quality Reliability Comparability Usefulness None to Low No Low S-5 Specification of Sampling Error Requirements In this project Medium Quality Measure of Quality Comparability Reliability Usefulness None7 No Medium S-6 Default Variances In this project Low to Medium Quality Comparability None No Medium 4 Although unit costs will not change, overall survey costs will increase for those cases where the sample sizes are significantly larger than those used prior to establishing standards.
|
From page 51... ...
45 Ref Item Category Effort Req. Potential Benefits Expected Costs Fieldwork Required Importance Usefulness Reliability Measure of Quality Pilot Surveys and Pretests P-1 Focus Groups In this project/beyond scope Medium to High Usefulness Quality Reliability Low Maybe Low P-2 Requirements for Pretests or Pilots In this project Medium Quality Cost Effectiveness Usefulness Reliability None8 Maybe High P-3 Sample Sizes for Pretests and Pilots In this project Low to Medium Quality Cost Effectiveness Usefulness Reliability None7 No High P-4 Sample Sizes for Comparing Methodologies In this project Low to Medium Quality Cost Effectiveness Usefulness Reliability None7 No High P-5 Reporting of Pretests and Pilots In this project Low to Medium Usefulness Comparability None9 No Medium Survey Implementation E-1 Interviewer Training In this project/ Beyond scope Medium to High Quality Reliability Usefulness None to Low No Medium E-2 Ethics Immediate/In this project Low to Medium Quality Comparability None No Low E-3 Mailing Materials Immediate/In this project Low Cost Effectiveness Completeness Comparability Low Yes Low E-4 Respondent Questions Immediate/In this project Low Cost Effectiveness Quality Low Maybe Low E-5 Caller ID Immediate Low Quality Cost Effectiveness Completeness None Maybe High E-6 Retention of Data on Incomplete Households In this project Low Quality Measure of Quality Reliability Usefulness None Maybe Very High E-7 Cross-checks in Data Collection and Data Review In this project Low to Medium Cost Effectiveness Quality Reliability Usefulness Comparability None to Low Maybe High E-8 Days and Periods to Avoid for Data Collection In this project Low to Medium Comparability Cost Effectiveness Usefulness Quality None No Very High E-9 Answering Machines and Repeated Call-Back Requests In this project Low Cost Effectiveness Comparability Reliability Low No High E-10 Methods to Reduce Incorrect Reporting In this project?
|
From page 52... ...
46 Ref Item Category Effort Req. Potential Benefits Expected Costs Fieldwork Required Importance of Non-Mobiles Cost Effectiveness Usefulness E-11 Reporting Time of Day Immediate Low Comparability Reliability Cost Effectiveness None No Medium E-12 Time of Day to Begin and End Reporting Immediate Low Comparability Usefulness None No Low E-13 Creation of Identification Numbers Immediate/In this project Low Comparability Usefulness None No Very High Data Coding Including Geocoding C-1 Geocoding Standards In this project Medium Quality Completeness Comparability Usefulness Low to Medium No High C-2 Level of Geocoding to be Performed In this project Medium Quality Comparability Usefulness Low Maybe High C-3 Geocoding Out-ofRegion Addresses In this project Medium Completeness Usefulness Cost Effectiveness Low No Medium C-4 Missing Values, Use of Zero, Etc.
|
From page 53... ...
47 Ref Item Category Effort Req. Potential Benefits Expected Costs Fieldwork Required Importance Reliability Q-3 Coverage Error In this project Low to Medium Measure of Quality Reliability Comparability Quality None to Low No High Q-4 Sampling Error In this project Low Measure of Quality Quality Reliability Comparability None No High Q-5 Proxies Immediate Low Measure of Quality Quality Reliability Completeness Comparability Low to Medium No Very High Q-6 Validation Statistics In this project Low Measure of Quality Quality Comparability Reliability Low Maybe Low Q-7 Data Cleaning Statistics Immediate/In this project Low Measure of Quality Comparability Usefulness Completeness None to Low Maybe Medium Q-8 Number of Missing Values Immediate Low Measure of Quality Comparability Completeness Low No High Q-9 Adherence to Quality Guidelines Immediate/In this project Low Measure of Quality Quality Comparability None to Low No Medium
|
Key Terms
This material may be derived from roughly machine-read images, and so is provided only to facilitate research.
More
information on Chapter Skim is available.