Coleen Dickman
019:169 Response
19 November 2009
Cross-Sectional vs. Longitudinal Surveys
In his article, “Cross-Sectional Versus Longitudinal Survey Research: Concepts, Findings, and Guidelines,” Rindfleisch identifies two types of surveys: cross-sectional and longitudinal. A cross-sectional survey is conducted at a distinct point in time and measures all respondents at that point in time. Therefore, when conducting a cross-sectional survey it’s important to obtain a great degree in variance of the people surveyed. Longitudinal surveys are conducted over periods of time by following respondents as they age. Rindfleisch identifies two main issues that arise when conducting these surveys: common method variance (CMV) and casual inference (CI). Common method variance is caused by systematic method error that arises from using a single source. Causal inference, in comparison, occurs when interpreting the data and arises if a scientist is unable to find causation from the results. Common method variance blinds the researcher from making accurate inferences, and combined increase the overall error. CMV is most often an issue with cross-sectional surveys, and although longitudinal surveys reduce this bias, their practicality is often an issue. Longitudinal studies require a great degree of effort on the part of the researcher and the respondent. They are often very expensive and time consuming. Therefore, to reduce CMV bias, Rindfleisch suggests using multiple respondents in a cross-sectional survey to decrease bias by providing for more variety in responses. He also found that obtaining multiple data sources and obtaining such data over multiple periods of time would reduce CMV bias. However, if these suggestions could not be implemented in the survey, the researcher should conduct a longitudinal survey to ensure validity in their results. The APR guide further discussed these issues as well as delving into marketing research/public relations concerns.
Personally, I think that longitudinal studies are much more appealing than practical. As a researcher, having to track down the original respondents to “follow-up” presents a great number of issues. For instance; if an original respondent moves, goes on vacation, or passes away, the data is greatly impacted. I think that longitudinal surveys are extremely interesting, especially in measuring trends and how issues change in their importance with age. Yet, I still think that when looking at the bigger picture, cross-sectional surveys are most convenient.
In an article published in ScienceDaily titled, “Fifty Years and Counting: The Wisconsin Longitudinal Study,” the longest longitudinal study ever conducted is analyzed. This study conducted in 1957 in Wisconsin is the longest survey conducted and has been published over 400 times in different publications. The study called the Wisconsin Longitudinal Study, or WLS studies the entire life course of its respondents including their education, career, family, aging, and retirement. The survey has been running for more than fifty years now and will continue to do so.
Link: http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2007/07/070719093336.htm
Cross-Sectional vs. Longitudinal Surveys
November 19, 2009 by iowajournalism
Leave a comment