Computer-assisted personal interviewing (CAPI) offers many attractive advantages over
paper and pencil interviewing (PAPI) and most large ongoing face-to-face surveys using
PAPI methods are likely to eventually shift to CAPI. Its advantages include improved and
more complex routing, automated checking of inconsistencies in the data with the respondent as they occur, simultaneous data entry, reduction in lags between interviews and data delivery, and capture of system information, such as section timestamps, during the interview (de Leeuw, Hox and Snijkers, 1995). Further, in panel surveys, CAPI facilitates much greater use of data collected in previous waves, thereby improving data quality (Jäckle, 2008).
Despite these apparent advantages, it is important to have a good understanding of the
impacts that a move from PAPI to CAPI has on survey outcomes, both to enable survey
managers to make appropriate implementation and budgeting decisions, and to ensure
appropriate interpretation of the resulting data.