Survey Responses for the NFRJ-08Panel, Waves 1-5

TANAKA Sigeto <>
(Graduate School of Arts and Letters, Tohoku University)
Japanese journal of family sociology. 26(2):165-168 (2014)
URI: {}
Short URL: {}
ReMCat: {2014:0916328X:26:165}
Blog entry: {}


The National Family Research of Japan {NFRJ} 2008-2012 Panel Study {NFRJ-08Panel} project finished its scheduled surveys after completing Wave 5 in February-March in 2013. The official report {NCID:BB15480829} has been published by the NFRJ Committee. In this paper, we review and evaluate the survey responses for the NFRJ-08Panel Waves 1-5.

I. The number of responses for each wave of the NFRJ-08Panel: Valid responses amounted to 1,622 for Wave 2 (2010), 1,555 for Wave 3 (2011), 1,515 for Wave 4 (2012), and 1,594 for Wave 5 (2013). Even for the Wave 4 with the fewest responses, we obtained more than 1,500 valid responses.

II. Detailed patterns of responses and valid response rates among waves: 1,317 returned valid responses for all waves. 217 returned three valid responses, 123 returned two, 121 returned one, and 101 returned no valid response for the four surveys of Waves 2-5. When we conducted {NFRJ08} (in 2009) for the sample of 9,400 people, there were 4,197 nonresponses for the NFRJ08 survey and 3,324 refusals to participate in the following panel surveys. Waves 2-5 (in 2010-2013) yielded 1,515 to 1,622 valid responses, indicating that withdrawals ranged from 257 to 364. 14.0% of the sampled 9400 people responded to the all five waves.

III. Methods of distribution and collection of questionnaires for Waves 1 and 5: Among all the valid responses for {NFRJ08}, 87.4% were handed an unsealed questionnaire to the canvasser, 11.0% were sealed in an envelope, and 1.6% were returned by mail (NFRJ08 1st report {NCID:BB02272294} p. 36). Among those who returned one or more valid response for Waves 2-5, 91.0% of the Wave 1 responses were retrieved in an unsealed questionnaire, a higher rate than for the whole pool of NFRJ-08 respondents, with an accordingly lower rate of collection with sealed envelope. These figures suggest that NFRJ08 respondents tended not to participate in our panel study, if they felt that handing an unsealed questionnaire to the canvasser compromised their privacy.


Table 1: The number of responses for each wave
Table 2: Detailed pattern of responses for Waves 2-5
Table 3: Method of collection for Wave 1
Table 4: Method of distribution and collection for Wave 5


  1. 稲葉昭英, 2010, 「NFRJ08 のデータ特性: 予備標本・回収率・有配偶率」『家族社会学研究』22(2):226-31. {doi:10.4234/jjoffamilysociology.22.226}
  2. 三輪哲, 2012, 「NFRJ-08Panelにおける脱落とデータ調整」『家族社会学研究』24(1): 97-102. {doi:10.4234/jjoffamilysociology.24.97}
  3. 永井暁子, 2010, 「NFRJ08 回答者の基本属性」『家族社会学研究』22(2): 232-7. {doi:10.4234/jjoffamilysociology.22.232}
  4. 日本家族社会学会全国家族調査委員会, 2010, 『第3回家族についての全国調査 (NFRJ08) 第一次報告書』. {NCID:BB02272294}
  5. 日本家族社会学会全国家族調査委員会, 2014, 『全国家族調査パネルスタディ(NFRJ-08Panel) 報告書』. {NCID:BB15480829}
  6. 菅澤貴之, 2013, 「NFRJ-08Panel 第5波調査票の特徴: 革新的な家族パネル調査データの構築を目指して」『家族社会学研究』25(2): 161-6. {naid:40019866577}
  7. 田中重人, 2009, 「NFRJ08 標本抽出と調査実施」『家族社会学研究』21(2): 208-13. {doi:10.4234/jjoffamilysociology.21.208}
  8. 三輪哲, 2014, 「NFRJ-08Panel におけるウェイトによる脱落への対処」『家族社会学研究』26(2): 169-178. {2014:0916328X:26:169}


An earlier version of this paper was published as Chapter I-5 (pages 24-26) of the officcial report or NFRJ-08Panel:

It includes figures equivalent to Tables 1, 3, 4 in this paper.


Questions/comments are welcome. Send your message via:

Related sites and pages

Tohoku University / Faculty of Arts and Letters / Applied Japanese Linguistics / TANAKA Sigeto / NFRJ

History of this page:

Generated 2014-11-17 13:56 +0900 with Plain2.

Copyright (c) 2014 TANAKA Sigeto