[AAPOR. 2016. Standard Definitions’ Final Dispositions of Cases Coded and Outcome Rates for Surveys. Revision 2016. Available at: www.aapor.org/Standards-Ethics/-Standard-Definitions-(1).aspx (accessed April 2020).]Search in Google Scholar
[Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science. 2013. “The Nonresponse Challenge to Surveys and Statistics.” Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, vol. 645. https://doi.org/10.1177/0002716212456815.10.1177/0002716212456815]Search in Google Scholar
[Beullens, K., G. Loosveldt, C. Vandenplas, and I. Stoop. 2018. “Response Rates in The European Social Survey: Increasing, Decreasing, or a Matter of Fieldwork Efforts?” Survey Methods: Insights from the Field. DOI: https://doi.org/10.13094/SMIF-2018-00003.]Search in Google Scholar
[Blom, A.G., E.D. de Leeuw, and J. Hox. 2011. “Interviewer Effects on Nonresponse in the European Social Survey.” Journal of Official Statistics 27(2): 359–377. Available at: https://www.scb.se/contentassets/ca21efb41fee47d293bbee5bf7be7fb3/interviewer-effects-on-nonresponse-in-the-european-social-survey.pdf (accessed April 2020).]Search in Google Scholar
[Brick, J.M. 2013. “Unit Nonresponse and Weighting Adjustments: A Critical Review.” Journal of Official Statistics 29: 329–352. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2478/jos-2013-0026.10.2478/jos-2013-0026]Search in Google Scholar
[Brick, M.J. and D. Williams. 2013. “Explaining rising response rates in cross-sectional surveys.” Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Sciences 645: 36–59. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0002716212456834.10.1177/0002716212456834]Search in Google Scholar
[Campanelli, P.C., P. Sturgis, and S. Purden. 1997. Can You Hear Me Knocking? An Investigation into the Impact of Interviewers on Survey Response Rates. London: SCPR. Available at: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/312910100_Can_you_hear_me_knocking_and_investigation_into_the_impact_of_interviewers_on_survey_response_rates (accessed April 2020).]Search in Google Scholar
[De Leeuw, E., and W. de Heer. 2002. Trends in Household Survey Nonresponse: A Longitudinal and International Comparison. In Survey Nonresponse, edited by R.M. Groves, D.A. Dillman, J.L. Eltinge, R.J.A. Little, 41–54. New York: Wiley.]Search in Google Scholar
[Dillman, D.A. (forthcoming). “Towards Survey Response Rate Theories that no longer pass each other like strangers in the night.” To appear in: Brenner, Philip (Ed). Understanding Survey Methodology: Sociological Theory and Applications. Springer books.]Search in Google Scholar
[Dillman, D.A., J.D. Smyth, and L.M. Christian. 2014. Internet, Phone, Mail and Mixed-Mode Surveys: The Tailored Design Method. John Wiley: Hoboken, NJ.]Search in Google Scholar
[Groves, R.M., R.B. Cialdin, and M.P. Couper. 1992. “Understanding the Decision to Participate in a Survey.” Public Opinion Quarterly 56(4): 475–495. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1086/269338.10.1086/269338]Search in Google Scholar
[Groves, R.M. and M.P. Couper. 1998. Nonresponse in Household Interview Surveys. New York: Wiley. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118490082.10.1002/9781118490082]Search in Google Scholar
[Groves, R.M., D.A. Dillman, J.L. Eltinge, and R.J.A. Little, (Eds.) 2002. Survey Nonresponse. New York: Wiley.]Search in Google Scholar
[Groves, R.M., E. Singer, and A. Corning. 2000. “Leverage-Saliency Theory of Survey Participation. Description and an Illustration.” Public Opinion Quarterly 64: 299–308. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1086/317990.10.1086/31799011114270]Search in Google Scholar
[Hox, J.J., E.D. de Leeuw, and H. Vorst. 1995. “Survey Participation as Reasoned Action; A Behavioral Paradigm for Survey Nonresponse?” Bulletin de Méthodologie Sociologique (BMS) 48: 52–67. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/075910639504800109.10.1177/075910639504800109]Search in Google Scholar
[Japec, L. 2008. Interviewer Error and Interviewer Burden. In J.M. Lepkowski, C. Tucker, J.M. Brick, E.D. de Leeuw, L. Japec, P.J. Lavrakas, M.W. Link, and R.L. Sangster (Eds.), Advances in Telephone Survey Methodology: 187–211. Hoboken: Wiley.]Search in Google Scholar
[JOS. 1999. “Special Issue on Nonresponse.” Journal of Official Statistics 15(2). available at: https://www.scb.se/en/documentation/statististical-methods/journal-of-official-statistics-jos/ (accessed April 2020).]Search in Google Scholar
[JOS. 2001. “Special Issue on Nonresponse.” Journal of Official Statistics 17(2). Available at: https://www.scb.se/en/documentation/statististical-methods/journal-of-official-statistics-jos/ (accessed April 2020).]Search in Google Scholar
[JOS. 2011. “Special Issue on Nonresponse.” Journal of Official Statistics 27(4). Available at: https://www.scb.se/en/documentation/statististical-methods/journal-of-official-statistics-jos/ (accessed April 2020).]Search in Google Scholar
[JOS. 2017. “Special Issue on Responsive and Adaptive Survey Design: Looking Back to See Forward.” Journal of Official Statistics 33(3). Available at: https://www.scb.se/en/-documentation/statististical-methods/journal-of-official-statistics-jos/ (accessed April 2020).10.1515/jos-2017-0027]Search in Google Scholar
[JOS. 2018. “Special Section on Responsive and Adaptive Survey Design.” Journal of Official Statistics 34(3). Available at: https://www.scb.se/en/documentation/statististical-methods/journal-of-official-statistics-jos/ (accessed April 2020).]Search in Google Scholar
[Koch, A. and R. Porst. 1998. Nonresponse in Survey Research. ZUMA SPEZIAL, Volume 4, Mannheim: ZUMA. Available at: https://www.gesis.org/en/services/publications/archive/zuma-and-za-publications/zuma-nachrichten-spezial (accessed April 2020).]Search in Google Scholar
[Kreuter, F. ed. 2013. Improving Surveys with Paradata: Analytic Uses of Process Information. John Wiley & Sons, Inc., Hoboken, New Jersey. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118596869.10.1002/9781118596869]Search in Google Scholar
[Laaksonen, S. 1996. International perspectives on Nonresponse. Helsinki, Statistics Finland. Available at: https://www.doria.fi/bitstream/handle/10024/176203/xtut_219_dig.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y (accessed April 2020).]Search in Google Scholar
[Loosveldt G. and D. Joye. 2016. Defining and Assessing Survey Climate In: C. Wolf, D. Joye, T.W. Smith, & Y. Fu (Eds.) The SAGE Handbook of Survey Methodology: 67–76. SAGE Publications Ltd. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4135/9781473957893.n6.10.4135/9781473957893.n6]Search in Google Scholar
[Morton-Williams, J. 1993. Interviewer Approaches. Aldershot: Dartmouth.]Search in Google Scholar
[Singer, E. 2011. Towards a Cost-Benefit Theory of Survey Participation: Evidence, Further Test, and Implications. Journal of Official Statistics 27(2): 379–392. Available at: https://www.scb.se/contentassets/ca21efb41fee47d293bbee5bf7be7fb3/toward-abenefit-cost-theory-of-survey-participation-evidence-further-tests-and-implications.pdf (accessed June 2020).]Search in Google Scholar
[Schouten, B., A. Peytchev, and J. Wagner. 2017. Adaptive Survey Design. Series on Statistics Handbooks. Chapman & Hall/CRC. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1201/9781315153964.10.1201/9781315153964]Search in Google Scholar
[Stoop, I.A.L. 2005. The Hunt for the Last Respondent. The Hague, Social and Cultural Planning Office.]Search in Google Scholar
[Stoop, I.A.L. 2016. Unit Nonresponse. In: C. Wolf, D. Joye, T.W. Smith, & Y. Fu (Eds.) The SAGE Handbook of Survey Methodology: 409–424. SAGE Publications Ltd. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4135/9781473957893.n27.10.4135/9781473957893.n27]Search in Google Scholar
[Stoop, I., J. Billiet, A. Koch, and R. Fitzgerald. 2010. Improving Survey Response. Lessons Learned from the European Social Survey. Chichester, John Wiley & Sons. Ltd. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/9780470688335.10.1002/9780470688335]Search in Google Scholar