Publication Type: Conference Paper/Unpublished Manuscript
Review Method: Peer Reviewed
Abstract: By the end of the initial registration period (August 31, 2003), the National Do Not Call Registry contained more than 50 million telephone numbers and that number continues to grow. The Registry was designed to address public concerns about unsolicited marketing calls and currently focuses on a specific segment of the call center industry. Although social science surveys are exempt from the “do not call” requirements, the saliency of the list in the public mind will have a ripple effect on these efforts. This may manifest as confusion on the part of sample members regarding the exempt status of survey organizations or as a future movement to have such organizations included under these rules. Additionally, some exempt organizations may choose to voluntarily abide by the Registry’s rules in acquiescence to the perceived public desires for fewer calls. For on-going data collection efforts, such as the Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System (BRFSS), changes in protocols – such as reducing calls to households on the DNC Registry or removing these sampled numbers all together – need to be evaluated thoroughly before such actions are undertaken. Due diligence is essential for ensuring the quality of these data, which are used extensively by state and federal health programs to monitor public health. If call protocol modifications do not introduce significant changes in response rates or estimates obtained, then voluntary compliance with the rules of the registry could be recommended to the states conducting the BRFSS. This evaluation examines the impact on participation rates and BRFSS estimates when the standard number of call attempts is reduced to households on the DNC Registry and when these numbers are pulled from the sample altogether. Data come from more than 165,000 sampled households in the 54 states and territories conducting the BRFSS in September 2003.

Publication Type: Conference Paper/Unpublished Manuscript
Abstract: While some have argued that informal job matching (i.e., using personal contacts to get jobs) is primarily confined to low wage positions, results from analyses of data from the NLSY reveal that informal matching is prevalent among executive and managerial occupations as well. Specifically, workers commonly gain access to these elite occupations through non-searching (i.e., obtaining jobs without engaging in a job search), suggesting that elite labor market positions tend to be filled through selective informal recruitment efforts and the receipt of unsolicited job offers and leads. However, non-searching is a more common pathway into elite occupations for white males than for women and racial minorities, illustrating the ways that social networks and informal hiring can reproduce gender and race inequalities across occupations.

Publication Type: Conference Paper/Unpublished Manuscript
Abstract: While estimating ideal points in recent congresses is non-problematic (Poole 2005), determining support along specific issue dimensions can be difficult when only a limited number of votes are available. This is the case with votes on lesbian and gay rights in Congress. Cosponsorship data provides another manifestation of support in a policy area and early support for legislation implies greater support along a policy dimension. I merge the date a member of Congress cosponsors legislation into a standard Bayesian MCMC item response model (Clinton, Jackman, and Rivers 2004) to obtain improved policy support scores for members of Congress and compare these to the Human Rights Campaign Scorecard traditionally used as measure of support for lesbian and gay rights. The scores show a sharp consolidation of the Republican Party at an anti-gay pole after the 1992 Republican Convention and the election of a Republican congress in 1994. This suggests that Republicans used their agenda setting powers to display a unified front against gay rights in order to appeal to anti-gay religious activists.

Publication Type: Abstract
Abstract: Rationale: Hospitals across the nation have complained of increasing challenges in maintaining specialist on-call coverage for their emergency departments. Many hospitals have begun subsidizing specialists for their on-call duties, and the on-call issue has dominated recent meetings held by the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services to re-evaluate the Emergency Medical Treatment and Labor Act (EMTALA). However, there is a paucity of evidence about the costs to hospitals to maintain call coverage.

Objectives: The objective of this study was to determine the prevalence and magnitude of stipends offered to specialists to take call in the State of Oregon.

Methodology: We surveyed CEOs of all hospitals with emergency departments in Oregon (N = 56) to determine payments made to specialists (including orhopedists, general surgeons, trauma surgeons, neurosurgeons, hand surgeons, obstetricians, and neurologists). We also determined whether on-call issues had led to changes in hospitals’ trauma designation or whether they were unable to provide 24-7 coverage for certain specialties.

Results: We received responses from 54 out of 56 hospitals, representing a 96% response rate (100% of trauma centers). The two hospitals that did not respond were small (<20 beds), rural hospitals. 40% of hospitals pay a stipend to at least one specialty. Stipends ranged from a few hundred dollars per month to over $3000 per night, with a median stipend of $1000 per night to take call. Trauma surgeons, neurosurgeons, and orthopedists were the most likely to receive stipends, and received the highest average stipends. In addition, 30% of hospitals guarantee pay for uninsured patients seen on-call. 7 out of 56 hospitals have had their trauma designation affected by on-call issues, and a number of others are threatened.

Conclusions: Stipends for specialists who provide emergency call coverage are common and substantial. A continuation of this trend may affect hospitals’ ability to support the trauma system.

Publication Type: Paper/Poster Proposal
Abstract: With more than 64 million phone numbers on the National Do Not Call Registry, it is surprising to find little research addressing the Do Not Call List’s impact on survey response rates. While many researchers initially suggested the Do Not Call List would negatively affect response rates, we speculated that it has little or no effect on survey response. In this study, we compared response rates as well as other measures of cooperation for households that are on the Do Not Call List versus those that are not. We also explored: characteristics of households on the Do Not Call List; public awareness of Do Not Call-exempt-groups; perceived effectiveness of the Do Not Call List in reducing telemarketing calls; whether households that now receive fewer calls are more responsive; and whether it is beneficial to educate respondents on the industry’s exempt status during the course of the interviewing process. This research is part of a statewide survey with a representative sample of Pennsylvanian adults. Respondents who initially refused were re-contacted after one month by phone/mail to obtain a complete understanding of the issues involved.