Incorporating Adaptive Survey Design in a Two-Stage National Web or Mail Mixed-Mode Survey: An Experiment in the American Family Health Study.

This article presents the results of an adaptive design experiment in the recruitment of households and individuals for a two-stage national probability web or mail mixed-mode survey, the American Family Health Study (AFHS). In the screening stage, we based the adaptive design's subgroup differentiation on Esri Tapestry segmentation. We used tailored invitation materials for a subsample where a high proportion of the population was Hispanic and added a paper questionnaire to the initial mailing for a subsample with rural and older families. In the main-survey stage, the adaptive design targeted the households where a member other than the screening respondent was selected for the survey. The adaptations included emailing and/or texting, an additional prepaid incentive, and seeking screening respondents' help to remind the selected individuals. The main research questions are (i) whether the adaptive design improved survey production outcomes and (ii) whether combining adaptive design and postsurvey weighting adjustments improved survey estimates compared to performing postsurvey adjustments alone. Unfortunately, the adaptive designs did not improve the survey production outcomes. We found that the weighted AFHS estimates closely resemble those of a benchmark national face-to-face survey, the National Survey of Family Growth, although the adaptive design did not additionally change survey estimates beyond the weighting adjustments. Nonetheless, our experiment yields useful insights about the implementation of adaptive design in a self-administered mail-recruit web or mail survey. We were able to identify subgroups with potentially lower response rates and distinctive characteristics, but it was challenging to develop effective protocol adaptations for these subgroups under the constraints of the two primary survey modes and the operational budget of the AFHS. In addition, for self-administered within-household selection, it was difficult to obtain contact information from, reach, and recruit selected household members that did not respond to the screening interview.