Table 4.
Strengths and weaknesses of mobile phone surveys (MPS) by modality (adapted from Demombynes (2013) and Ballivian (2013)).
| Strengths | Weaknesses | |
| Computer-assisted telephone interview (CATI) | ||
| Respondent’s familiarity with a phone call interaction | Resource intensive (operators, supervisors, training) | |
| Operators can clarify questions | Inter-rater reliability concerns | |
| Ability to build rapport with respondents | Potential for interviewer bias | |
| Does not require respondents to be literate | Respondents may be less truthful for sensitive questions | |
| Requires sustained network signal | ||
| Interactive voice Response (IVR) | ||
| Mimics a phone call | Requires sustained network signal | |
| Does not require respondents to be literate | Respondents may not be familiar with “robot” calls | |
| Automated surveys allows for quick data collection | Potential for respondent to be distracted while answering the survey | |
| Minimizes interviewer bias | Poor audio quality of some phones | |
| Less expensive than CATI due to its automation | ||
| Short Message Service (SMS) | ||
| Respondents answer at their convenience | May not reach illiterate respondents | |
| Automated surveys allows for quick data collection | Requires network signal, possibility of lost messages | |
| Minimizes interviewer bias | Question length limited by character count | |
| Less expensive than CATI due to its automation | Inbox can become full | |