Articles

28Oct

Caller Identification: Best Practices for Survey, Opinion and Marketing Researchers

Although existing regulations on caller identification (caller ID) at the state and federal level apply primarily to telemarketers, or to intent involving fraud or other criminal activity, policymakers are considering legislation prohibiting various deceptive caller ID practices and there are existing state laws that prohibit the intent to falsify or misrepresent caller ID information. This could impact researchers that intentionally block or alter their caller identification information.

To prevent negative regulatory and legislative activity directed at the research profession, further legitimacy of the profession and improve respondent cooperation, MRA recommends that survey, opinion and marketing researchers adhere to the same standard as existing regulations. All researchers should use (or require their calling centers and data collectors to use) calling equipment that is capable of transmitting caller ID information and ensure that the telephone number transmitted allows the called respondent to identify the entity making and/or responsible for the call (as deemed appropriate).

Best Practices for Name and Number Transmitted

The transmitted number should be one that the respondent can call back on. Further, it should be one that is answered (by a live person or a recording, with the ability to leave a message) during the research organization's normal business hours and one that would allow a respondent to leave a message, after hours. Depending on the business needs of the research organization, such a number could be an 800 number, or other such number, which results in no cost to the respondent. However, under no circumstances should any researcher transmit a pay-per-call number (900 number) as its calling number. Should the researchers prefer to display the name and number of the entity responsible for the call (i.e., the client), rather than the name and number of the research organization or call center, the above practices should apply in the same manner. It is up to the research organization, based upon the needs of its business, whether to have the number transmitted via Caller ID answered by: a live representative of the research organization or call center; an interactive voice response (IVR) system; or a voicemail system. The first option is the best option, but as long as respondents can reach further information and have the option to make a do-not-contact request, any of the three shall suffice. Prohibitions for Researchers Under no circumstances should survey and opinion researchers intentionally block the transmission of their calling information to respondents nor should they transmit false information via Caller ID.

The information provided in this document is not intended and should not be construed as or substituted for legal advice. It is provided for informational purposes only. It is advisable to consult with private counsel on the precise scope and interpretation of any given laws/legislation and their impact on your particular business.

About the Author

Howard Fienberg

Howard Fienberg

Based in Washington, DC, Howard is the Insights Association's lobbyist for the marketing research and data analytics industry, focusing primarily on consumer privacy and data security, the Telephone Consumer Protection Act (TCPA), tort reform, and the funding and integrity of the decennial Census and the American Community Survey (ACS). Howard has more than two decades of public policy experience. Before the Insights Association, he worked in Congress as senior legislative staffer for then-Representatives Christopher Cox (CA-48) and Cliff Stearns (FL-06). He also served more than four years with a science policy think tank, working to improve the understanding of scientific and social research and methodology among journalists and policymakers. Howard is also co-director of The Census Project, a 900+ member coalition in support of a fair and accurate Census and ACS. He has also served previously on the Board of Directors for the National Institute for Lobbying and Ethics and and the Association of Government Relations Professionals. Howard has an MA International Relations from the University of Essex in England and a BA Honors Political Studies from Trent University in Canada, and has obtained the Certified Association Executive (CAE), Professional Lobbying Certificate (PLC) and the Public Policy Certificate (PPC). When not running advocacy for the Insights Association, Howard enjoys hockey, NFL football, sci-fi and horror movies, playing with his dog, and spending time with family and friends.

Related

Massachusetts H. 312 Would Restrict Use of Local Area Codes

Massachusetts H. 312 Would Restrict Use of Local Area Codes

Massachusetts H. 312 would prohibit using or displaying a local area code in caller ID unless the ca...

Read More >
Michigan H.B. 6307 Would Double-Up TCPA Penalties and Restrict Polling Calls on Behalf of Political Organizations

Michigan H.B. 6307 Would Double-Up TCPA Penalties and Restrict Polling Calls on Behalf of Political Organizations

The Michigan Telephone Solicitation Act (H.B. 6307) would, among many provisions, prevent telephone ...

Read More >
DO NOT Call Act of 2021 - S. 1913 and H.R. 4919

DO NOT Call Act of 2021 - S. 1913 and H.R. 4919

The Deter Obnoxious, Nefarious, and Outrageous Telephone (DO NOT) Call Act (S. 1913 and H.R. 4919) w...

Read More >
United States Call Center Worker and Consumer Protection Act of 2021 - S. 2409 and H.R. 4603

United States Call Center Worker and Consumer Protection Act of 2021 - S. 2409 and H.R. 4603

The United States Call Center Worker and Consumer Protection Act of 2021 (S. 2409 and H.R. 4603) wou...

Read More >

New York Law S. 4281 Requires Call Authentication by Telecom Providers

New York law S. 4281 requires voice service providers to implement the SHAKEN/STIR call authenticati...

Read More >
New Harsh TCPA-Like Florida Law S.B. 1120 Only Targets Telemarketing

New Harsh TCPA-Like Florida Law S.B. 1120 Only Targets Telemarketing

Florida Governor Ron Desantis (R) signed S.B. 1120 into law on June 29, 2021, providing severe penal...

Read More >
Members only Article - Please login to view