Find Paper, Faster
Example:10.1021/acsami.1c06204 or Chem. Rev., 2007, 107, 2411-2502
The Importance of House Effects for Repeated Public Opinion Surveys
International Journal of Public Opinion Research  (IF2.11),  Pub Date : 2019-11-08, DOI: 10.1093/ijpor/edz039
Schumann D, Shamon H, Hake J.

Results of public opinion surveys on the same topic can diverge for various reasons, for example, different survey timings, different operationalizations of the objects of investigation, different target populations, or the fact that the surveys are conducted by different survey agencies (“houses”). The latter phenomenon is conventionally referred to as “house effects” (Smith, 1978, 1982, 2011; Weisberg, 2005), which can occur even if the survey agencies use identical question wordings or target populations (cf., Converse & Traugott, 1986; Erikson & Wlezien, 2001; Flores, 2015; Lau, 1994; Traugott, 2005; Wlezien & Erikson, 2007). However, although the existence of house-related differences in survey results has been well known in public opinion research since the two studies by Tom W. Smith from 1978 and 1982, respectively (Smith, 1978, 1982), little work has been done on the relevance of house effects in repeated surveys. Furthermore, the studies that investigated house effects in repeated surveys were based on secondary data which were primarily collected to measure public opinion on certain topics rather than to address methodological research questions (Smith, 1978; Wright, Farrar, & Russell, 2014).11 Thus, in these studies, it was impossible to control for factors influencing differences between houses such as interviewer instructions, sampling procedures, order and position of questions in the questionnaire or basic parameters to be fulfilled by the houses during the field work.