Publication Type: Conference Paper/Unpublished Manuscript
Review Method: Peer Reviewed
Abstract: Promotion and publicity of large scale surveys has been routinely undertaken by organizations in the hopes of improving survey response. This may take many forms and information about upcoming data collection may be delivered to potential respondents in many different ways. The operational assumption behind promotion and publicity efforts is that higher awareness and more positive opinions of the survey will lead to higher data quality and lower costs. Costs can be reduced both through higher initial response and also with speedier responses, both leading to a reduction in costly followup data collection costs.

Prior to data collection (and most publicity efforts) for the 2002 Census of Agriculture, the USDA’s National Agricultural Statistics Service (NASS) conducted a survey of a subset of the Census population. This survey collected information about the respondents’ awareness of the NASS, the upcoming Census of Agriculture and self reports of exposure to publicity and promotion of the Census. Information was also collected again, after publicity and promotion for the Census had been conducted and respondents should all have received at least one mailed Census form to complete. Measures of the overall effectiveness of NASS publicity efforts were made by comparing results of the 2 surveys. Response rates and speed of returns for those with the most knowledge of the Census were compared with those with the least. Analysis was also conducted to determine if the types of materials seen (e.g. NASS printed materials, media features, advertisements, live presentations or speeches, etc.), or the source of the material (e.g. from USDA personnel, from media sources, from friends and neighbors, from trade associations, etc.) affected response differently.

Results of this research will help determine whether publicity and promotion efforts are worthwhile and how best to target them.

Publication Type: Conference Paper/Unpublished Manuscript
Review Method: Peer Reviewed
Abstract: Census 2000 was conducted in a social and political context that impacted the design, collection, and use of the decennial count of the U.S. population. Sparked by an unprecedented partisan battle in the legislature and courts about how census methods would affect census results, and fueled by accusations of deliberate undercounting of racial minorities during the last count, Census 2000 became the center of a heated political debate, particularly over the issue of privacy. The tension between privacy and the insatiable demand for information in American society is evident in the declining response rates to previous data counts and to all surveys.

Publication Type: Conference Paper/Unpublished Manuscript
Review Method: Peer Reviewed
Abstract: States fielded early censuses primarily for the purposes of resource extraction. However in the 19th century, the emphasis of census redaction shifted from taxation to enumerating national populations, in keeping with the rise of new political ideology that equated populaceness with state power. Colonial censuses developed within this particular political context. Scholars recognize that the colonial census categories developed by states embodied politically and ideologically motivated choices about what to count. Much of the literature on colonial censuses, however, assumes a markedly state-centered or 'top-down' approach to census enumeration. This piece presents an alternative view by showing how existing lay categories such as caste and lay institutions such as popular numeracy initially facilitated the colonial powers' efforts to conduct censuses in their colonies. In doing thus, we draw upon three empirical examples: census-taking in the colonial United States, British India and Italian East Africa. Our findings indicate that the existence of popular categories such as race (in the colonial U.S.) or religious affiliation (in India) and widespread lay numeracy (in both milieux) aided British efforts to enumerate their colonial subjects in these two territories. Italy, however, was hampered in its efforts to field censuses in East Africa owing to a lack of analogous lay categories and institutions in its colonies there.

Publication Type: Conference Paper/Unpublished Manuscript
Abstract: Census and contractor data highlight problems field staff (listers) experienced using handheld computers (HHCs) during the address canvassing dress rehearsal operation in 2007. Help desk logs, revealed that listers most frequently reported issues with transmission, the device freezing, mapspotting (collecting mapping coordinates), and difficulties working with large blocks. When problems were identified, the contractor downloaded corrected software to the HHCs, The Bureau acknowledged that issues with the use of technology affected field staff productivity. The Bureau recognized that technology issues affected operations, but did not fully assess the magnitude of key measures of HHC performance. Technology issues and the Bureau’s efforts to redesign FDCA have significant implications for address canvassing. Among these are ensuring that FDCA solutions for technical issues identified in the dress rehearsal are tested, the help desk adequately supports field staff. In June 2008, the Bureau developed a testing plan that includes a limited operational field test, but the plan does not specify the basis for determining readiness of the FDCA solution for address canvassing and when and how this determination will occur.

Publication Type: Conference Paper/Unpublished Manuscript
Review Method: Peer Reviewed
Abstract: The purpose of this cognitive research was to quickly assess respondent behavior and impressions of two alternative versions of the Hispanic origin and race items on two paper mock versions of the 2010 decennial census short form. This report is qualitative and discusses items tested during one round of in-person, cognitive interviews among 40 adult respondents based on the following four research priorities:

1)Encouraging Spanish, Hispanic and Latino respondents to provide responses to the race and ethnicity items from among the answer categories listed on the census short form, rather than using ‘Some other race (SOR)’ or other write-in lines, such as ‘Other Pacific Islander’ for response;
2)To evaluate respondents’ use and understanding of the inclusion of the term ‘Caucasian’ for the first time as a corollary to the response category ‘White’;
3)Reporting options for Central and South American Indian respondents who do not know that they may choose the ‘American Indian or Alaska Native’ response option or who prefer not to do so; and
4)To assess proxy reporting issues, particularly issues arising from parents reporting children’s race and ethnicity.

The motivation for this small-scale, cognitive study is the Census Bureau’s continuing need to address data completeness, data quality, item nonresponse, respondent burden, and questionnaire format, content and wording issues all while simultaneously addressing reporting compliance needs among an increasingly diverse US population.