Technology: Further comments 

on the choice of tablets

Sarah Nusser

Department of Statistics

Center for Survey Statistics and Methodology

Iowa State University
Questions

• Why tablets?

• What other technologies were considered?

• Why not use the respondents' technology?

• Why focus on a device rather than an 

application?

• What is the impact of tablets on proxy 

reporting?
National Resources Inventory

• Remote sensing data collection 

– Every 5 years from 1982-1997

– Annually 2000-2012 and forward

• Sources

– Field visits  mylar overlays on borrowed 35 mm slides 

contracted high quality aerial photos for sample segments 

• Data collection tools

– Paper forms  Newton handheld e-forms  integrated system 

with GIS tools for data collection and progress/quality 

monitoring 

• Sample design

– Simple repeated panel design  Panel observed every year + 

supplemental panels each year

– Estimation changes accordingly

• Field studies: rugged handheld with GPS, iPads with GIS, GPS
Philosophical perspective

• A survey organization today must consider 

technology a moving target

– We can’t predict very accurately what’s next

– The leaps that are hardest to predict are paradigm 

shifts

– Must constantly be working incrementally to 

advance systems that are used for production
Philosophical perspective

• A longitudinal survey needs a stable 

technology base and consistent software to 

support data collection

– Leverage training that field staff and respondents 

receive for data collection to improve 

operational efficiency and data quality

– Avoid changes in meaning of variables associated 

with new methods

– Need to minimize risk of failure
How does this work?

• Develop a simple form of a system for initial 

production

• Evolve the system incrementally in ways that avoid 

issues with changing the data

• Anticipate the next change, do some research and 

prototyping, work out approach 

• Design a study or overlap panel that can be used to 

evaluate and estimate any differences in old and new

• Use estimation to adjust as needed (avoid if possible)

• Full implementation of new system
Form factor

• Device choice is less about which device today 

vs 5 years from now, and more about whether 

the device will support low burden, high data 

quality self-administered data collection, while 

containing data collection costs
Form factor

• Key issue: need to facilitate easy entry of a 

multidimensional household data vector that 

gets entered by numerous people, whose 

reporting behavior varies in unpredictable 

ways

• Survey instrument software application will be 

complicated 
Form factor

• Tablet form factor is far easier when the 

application gets complicated

– Screen real estate

– Ease of interacting with interface

– Good models for creating usable software for 

complex applications
Why a dedicated device?

• Control over the appearance of the survey 

software 

– More consistency in data quality likely

• Coverage includes individuals who don’t have 

a suitable personal device

• Lower cost

– Simpler software and backend system

– Simpler training for field staff

– Cheaper support – 1 software, controlled device
Using a respondent’s device

• Smart phone, or more broadly, web-based survey 

instrument

• Developing and supporting software for a handful 

of platforms (device or web browser) is expensive 

– Software must work well in each unique condition 

requires  complex development 

– Lack of control over device and network issues  

technical support is challenging

– Lack of control over the consistency over display of 

survey instrument and its usability

– Form factor aside, this would be costly and potentially 

reduce data quality
Using a respondent’s device

• Coverage 

– Do all members of the household have a suitable 

device?

– Expect larger fraction of non-coverage relative to a 

dedicated device

• Smart phone

– Application or web screen real estate is 

inadequate given complexity of survey instrument
Other technologies

• Scanners 

– Backend processing and quality checking would be 

expensive to get this to work for every situation

– Should continue to be investigated

• Voice recognition

– Not really considered

– Would need to be investigated
Proxy reporting

• Design allows multiple respondents per 

household

• Anticipate better control of member’s recording 

with a trained primary household respondent

• System offers a way to monitor compliance of 

members and provide feedback

• Fewer, but still some concerns about proxy 

reporting

– Quality and cost improvements associated with a 

dedicated single device outweighed them

– Warrants some investigation