Score contribution per author:
α: calibrated so average coauthorship-adjusted count equals average raw count
Ubiquitous mobile phone ownership makes phone surveying an attractive method of low-cost data collection. We explore differences between in-person and phone survey measures of agricultural production collected for an impact evaluation in India. Phone responses have greater mean and variance, a difference that persists even within a subset of respondents that answered the same question over both modes. Treatment effect estimation remains stable across survey mode, but estimates are less precise when using phone data. These patterns are informative for cost and sample size considerations in study design and for aggregating evidence across study sites or time periods.