Pew Research Center’s American Trends Panel released the full methodology for Wave 185, a nationally representative survey of U.S. Adults conducted in late January 2026.
Key Details
Overview
Wave 185 was fielded from Jan. 20 to Jan. 26, 2026. Out of 9,302 sampled adults, 8,512 completed the questionnaire, yielding a survey‑level response rate of 92 %. The cumulative response rate, which accounts for all stages of recruitment and attrition, stands at 3 %, and the break‑off rate among those who began the survey is 2 %. The margin of sampling error for the full sample is ±1.4 percentage points.
Panel Recruitment
Since 2018 the panel has used address‑based sampling (ABS). A cover letter and pre‑incentive are mailed to a stratified random sample drawn from the U.S. Postal Service’s Computerized Delivery Sequence File, which covers an estimated 90 % to 98 % of the population. Within each household the adult with the next birthday is selected. Prior to 2018, recruitment relied on landline and cellphone random‑digit‑dial surveys.
Annual recruitment began in 2014, with periodic oversamples of underrepresented groups—Hispanic adults in 2019, Black adults in 2022, and Asian adults in 2023.
Sample Design
The target population is non‑institutionalized adults aged 18 + in the United States. The sample is stratified and drawn from ATP members who completed Wave 183. Non‑Hispanic Asian adults and respondents aged 18‑29 were selected with certainty; all other respondents were sampled to match the population distribution as closely as possible. Weights adjust for differential selection probabilities.
Questionnaire Development and Testing
The questionnaire was created by Pew Research Center in consultation with SSRS. The online platform was rigorously tested on both PC and mobile devices, and test data were run through SPSS to verify logic and randomization before launch.
Incentives
All participants received a post‑paid incentive, selectable as a check or a gift code for Amazon.com, Target.com, or Walmart.com. Incentive amounts ranged from $5 to $20, calibrated to encourage participation among groups that historically have lower response propensities.
Data Collection Protocol
Surveys were administered via self‑administered web forms (8,272 respondents) and live telephone interviews (240 respondents) in English and Spanish. Online participants received postcard notifications on Jan. 20, followed by a soft launch invitation to 60 panelists on Jan. 20 and a full launch invitation on Jan. 21, plus up to two email and two SMS reminders. Phone respondents received prenotification postcards on Jan. 16, a soft launch call on Jan. 20, and up to six follow‑up calls during the field period.
Data Quality Checks
Researchers screened for satisficing behavior, such as excessive item non‑response or patterned answer selection. Two respondents were removed from the dataset before weighting and analysis.
Weighting
Weighting begins with a base weight reflecting each panelist’s probability of recruitment. Adjustments align the sample with population benchmarks, correct for non‑response at recruitment and at Wave 183, and account for any subsampling within the wave. Final weights are trimmed at the 1st and 99th percentiles to limit variance, and all statistical testing incorporates these weighting adjustments.
Frequently Asked Questions
What was the response rate for Wave 185?
Eight thousand five hundred twelve of the 9,302 sampled adults responded, resulting in a 92 % survey‑level response rate. The cumulative response rate across all stages is 3 %.
How are panel members recruited?
Since 2018, recruitment uses address‑based sampling from the U.S. Postal Service’s delivery sequence file, with a cover letter and pre‑incentive mailed to a random household sample. The adult with the next birthday is selected to join the panel.
What weighting adjustments are applied to the data?
Base weights reflect recruitment probabilities and are calibrated to population benchmarks. Adjustments also correct for non‑response at recruitment, attrition, and any subsampling within the wave, with final weights trimmed at the 1st and 99th percentiles.
How might these methodological choices affect the interpretation of future ATP findings?
