Information Technologies for Household Survey Management

Transportation Research Record, 1998

Presented are the findings of a pretest of a travel behavior survey conducted in the Dallas—Fort Worth region. The pretest directly compared five methodological options: ( a) a 24-h versus 48-h diary period; ( b) a shorter versus longer series of questions about each activity recorded; ( c) three types of incentives to encourage response; ( d) a booklet versus log format for the diaries; and ( e) telephone versus mailback retrieval of information. A diary recording period of 24 h was 1.6 times more likely to result in a completed household survey response than a 48-h recording period ( p-value <0.01). Telephone retrieval was twice as likely to result in a completed household than through mailbacks ( p-value <0.01). There was a significant difference ( p

ABSTRACT Household travel surveys remainan essential componentof transport planning and modelling efforts. However, with rising costs of many surveys, and the critical need for goodquality data,how best to obtain a quality survey that also provides comparable data to other household travel surveys,is a question that constantly arises. The National Cooperative Highway Research Program sponsored a research project to develop and recommend,standards for household travel surveys . The purpose of this research is toassist in maintaining a minimum,standard ofquality in household travel surveys and thuslead to greater comparability across surveys. This paper reviews t he state of practice with respect to specifying standards for surveys in general. Standards for household travel surveys are found to be non-existent, while those for any type of social survey are found to be uncommon, and deal with only a few aspects of surveys. In this research effort, over sixty possible areas for standard...

2008

According to a recent National Cooperative Highway Research Program (NCHRP) report, internet surveys for collection of transportation data are in an experimental stage and “have yet to undergo extensive field testing.” Comparative studies are recommended “to determine what consistent practice should be” for Internet-based data collection (1) . This paper compares a recent internet-based survey to a mail-based survey conducted of downtown employees in Buffalo, NY. Surprisingly, many of the demographic characteristics and journey to work patterns of respondents from these two approaches are similar, if not identical. In addition, the internet survey was significantly more cost and time efficient. These findings suggest that in certain circumstances, data from internet surveys may be reliable enough for use in decision making. Mix, Chernoff, and Trabold 2 INTRODUCTION Federal, state, and local transportation agencies require personal travel data for use in planning models and other dec...

2003

Household travel surveys continue to be a mainstay of transport planning and modelling efforts. With rising costs of many surveys, and the critical need for good quality data, questions are raised with increasing frequency on how best to obtain a quality survey that also provides comparable data to other household travel surveys. To try to provide some useful answers to these questions, the National Cooperative Highway Research Program sponsored a research project to develop and recommend standards for household travel surveys that would assist in maintaining a minimum standard of quality in such surveys and that would lead to greater comparability across surveys. In this paper, the state of practice with respect to specifying standards for surveys in general is reviewed. Standards for household travel surveys are found to be non-existent, while those for any type of social survey are found to be uncommon, and to deal with only a few aspects of surveys. In this research effort, over sixty possible areas for standards have been identified, of which more than forty are expected to be developed before the research is complete. This paper describes the results of work on about fourteen of these areas of standards and guidance. A number of proposed standards are outlined, including details of the analysis that, in some instances, has led to the proposals. These proposals have been developed in the North American context, but may also offer potential for other countries, especially in Europe, Australia, and New Zealand. The standards are also intended to be helpful to those who are responsible for developing requests for proposals to undertake household travel surveys, but who lack the level of knowledge and experience to be certain what to request. A number of potential standards are discussed in the paper. The first ones have to do with the initial design phases of a survey, including when a pilot survey or pretest should be done, how to determine a sample size for a pretest or pilot survey, and what is involved in comparing alternative designs within a pilot survey. The second area concerns the instrument design, and addresses such areas as the core set of questions that should be included in any household travel survey, standardising the categories for answers, and developing standard question wordings for certain questions, such as income. A third area includes issues such as the time of day to begin and end a survey, how to report time of day, how to handle answering machines and repeated requests for call backs, reducing incorrect reporting of non-mobility, proxy reporting, and specifications concerning mailing materials. The final area considered in this paper is that of coding of survey results, including missing values, coding complex variables like activities, and computing response rates. Illustrations are provided, where possible, of the consequences of not having standards and the difficulties and loss of quality that have arisen in

As response rates with all traditional modes (face-to-face, telephone and postal) are declining, it becomes difficult to carry out efficient households travel surveys. Non respondents probably have different behaviour from those who agree to be interviewed. To reduce this bias of non-response, we initiated a project of a web survey in parallel of the household travel survey conducted in face to face in Lyon in 2006. The idea is to propose to those households who refuse to respond or are not contactable after a certain number of attempts to respond by the web. The two main objectives of this research are to test the feasibility of a web survey for non-respondents and compare mobility results of both survey modes. We focus on the main bias often meet with this new media: on-line respondents belong to specific categories. After a description of the population who answered on-line, we characterize its travel pattern and estimate a selection bias.

Journal of Official Statistics, 2000

There is a risk of introducing survey error at every stage of any study involving a survey: design, data collection, processing, and analysis. Effectively managing the survey sample from the time of sample selection through the survey lifecycle is essential to producing highquality data on schedule and within budget. Managing the survey lifecycle using software systems that are not fully integrated can result in error and cost inefficiencies. The development of an integrated data collection and management system that supports monitoring of survey error has the potential to reduce errors and improve operational efficiencies. This system, referred to as Nirvana, uses a standardized database, protocol, and terminology. It integrates case status and history information across modes of data collection and tracing as well as sample and contact information. Nirvana also centralizes questionnaire development, quality monitoring, and support for real-time survey management decisions.

2012

Methods for Conducting a Large-Scale GPS-Only Survey of Households Past Household Travel Surveys (HTS) in the United States have only piloted small subsamples of Global Positioning Systems (GPS) completes compared with 1-2 day self-reported travel inventory diaries. The Ohio Department of Transportation Research Division, in cooperation with the Ohio-Kentucky-Indiana (OKI) Council of Governments, in 2009 initiated the first exclusively GPS Household Travel Survey (HTS) (e.g., no diaries). In addition, the ODOT GPS-only HTS is one of a few initial US studies to successfully use a personal devise GPS. Most past subsample studies have installed GPS in vehicles for recording and comparison of auto travel only. Additionally, this study was one of the first completed address-based HTS, which includes cell only households, with Internet recruit available. This research documents the protocols used for GPS deployment to all members of a household over 12 years old for a three-day recording period. Simplified diaries were provided for children under age 12. The main survey commenced in August of 2009. Recruitment of over 5,000 households progressed over a twelve month period, with proportional distribution. The highly stratified address-based sampling method used is described as well as the forms and materials, response rates for recruitment, and the compliance rates and experiences with households. Also described are the logistical challenges of getting 4+ persons households to all carry a GPS unit on a concurrent day and the challenge of loss rates on GPS units not returned. This research documents the Internet-based prompted recall (PR) verification method used and its outcomes. The PR was essentially used to impute mode of travel and trip purpose from GPS recordings. These imputation methods and findings are described. Also presented and discussed is the depth and degree of accuracy of core trip variables obtained using GPS-only methods, including modes, travel time and distance, and purpose at locations. Lessons learned are recorded. The primary conclusion to be drawn from this research is that it is feasible to undertake a GPS-only household travel survey, achieving a high standard of representativeness for the sample, while imputing mode and purpose at a sufficiently accurate level to support modeling work. The high level of accuracy attained in this survey for imputing mode and purpose with 96 percent on mode and around 90 percent on activity (other than detailed breakdowns of the "other" category) is far superior to self-report surveys. The richness of the "ground-truthing" of time, location, distance, speed, and route information from this survey surpasses what can be achieved from any other form of survey.

Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board, 2012

Methodologically, the NHTS has evolved over the past 40 years. A list-assisted random-digit dialing sampling and computer-assisted telephone interviewing (CATI) technology were used for the recent . However, because sampling and interviews are based on landline telephones, certain population groups including university students are not properly represented in the NHTS (4). This flaw is partly because only a relatively small percentage of university students live with their parents in conventional households. In addition, many college students use only a mobile phone, and their mobile phone numbers are often not associated with the geographic area of the students' residences. In this regard, large-scale travel surveys targeting university students-the University Student Travel Survey (USTS)-were conducted in 2009 and 2010 at Old Dominion University (ODU) (N = 708, N = 1,468) and Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University (VT) (N = 643, N = 1,128) to reveal their travel behavior (4-7). The USTS instrument design was based on the NHTS and was customized to university students.

Transportation Research Procedia, 2015

We present the results of a web survey presented to non-respondents of a main telephone survey and compare declared mobility of both survey modes. After a description of the population who answered online, we summarise travel patterns and estimate a selection bias. Results are consistent with the hypothesis of an under declaration attributable to the web, as far as we know, that the risk of omitting trips concerns especially short trips and less constrained trip purposes. From comparison with a previous face-to-face and web survey we give some perspectives for future household travel surveys.