Web Survey Bibliography
Title Advantages of Online Surveys
Author Parker, S., Schroeder, M., Fairfield-Sonn, J. W.
Source Foresight Survey Support International, Inc.
Access date 24.02.2006
Full text pdf (161k)
Abstract The Internet is now an acceptable and widely used medium for survey research, administration and reporting. It is estimated that the number of Internet users in the world doubles every year, with well over 200 million users currently linked to the World Wide Web (Cobanoglu, Warde & Moreo, 2001). While use of the Internet to conduct surveys of all types (employee, customer, membership, market, opinion polls, etc.) is now quite common, little has been published on how to most effectively develop and administer web-based survey systems. For most survey administrators and survey researchers, the question to move from traditional methods of survey administration to online is not “Should we?” but “When should we?” Web-based surveys and online technology are becoming more cost efficient and easier to use, but online surveys are not for everyone or every organization. Smaller organizations, i.e., less than 500 employees, organizations with outdated information technology systems and organizations whose employees do not use computers on a regular basis, may find web-based surveys too expensive and too difficult to administer. For some, traditional methods of employee survey administration still meet their needs. However, even smaller organizations can gain great benefits from using a web-based survey and online tools if they understand the costs and benefits involved. The important thing is to continue to ask employees for their opinions and thoughts regardless of the administration method used. To not survey at all would be the biggest mistake management could make. To help survey administrators and researchers understand the benefits and features of using web-based surveys and online tools, we have outlined some of the more common ways online technology can improve survey administration and reporting. These elements address the question “Why online?” Look at all factors when determining whether or not going “online” makes sense for your organization.
Access/Direct link FSSI homepage (full text)
Bibliographic typeReports, seminars
Year of publication2004
Web Survey Bibliography - Online measurement (986)
- Guide to social science data preparation. Best practice throughout the data life cycle; 2012
- Google et Médiamétrie créent une audience bimédia; 2012; Gonzales, P.
- Flowing with the mainstream. Is mobile market research finally living up to the hype?; 2012; Townsend, L.
- Online Surveys 2.0; 2012; Elferink, R.
- The Impact of Academic Sponsorship on Online Survey Dropout Rates; 2012; Allen, P. J., Roberts, L. D.
- Snowball Sampling in Online Social Networks; 2012; Raissi, M., Ackland, R.
- Data quality of questions sensitive to social-desirability bias in web surveys; 2012; Lozar Manfreda, K., Zajc, N., Berzelak, N., Vehovar, V.
- Online Questionnaires: Development of ‘basic requirements’; 2012; Tries, S., Blanke, K.
- Efficacy of a health-related Facebook social network site on health-seeking behaviors; 2012; Woolley, P., Peterson, M.
- Paradata; 2012; Kreuter, F.
- Modes of Data Collection; 2012; Tourangeau, R.
- Measure the response burden in the Swedish Intrastat system; 2012; Weideskog, F.
- Mode and non-response effects and their treatment; 2012; Chrysanthopoulos, S., Georgostathi, A.
- What can be said about quality in the Central Population Register based on a self-completion survey...; 2012; Falnes-Dalheim, E., Pedersen, H. E.
- Improving the quality of complex surveys: The case of the EU Labour Force Survey ; 2012; van der Valk, J.
- The re-engineering of the Structural Earnings survey process: Mixed - Mode data collection and new E...; 2012; Cardinaleschi, S., De Santis, S., Rocci, F., Spinelli, V.
- Between demand and reality: Ensuring efficiency and quality in pretesting questionnaires; 2012; Sattelberger, S., Blanke, K.
- How to provide high data quality in online-questionnaires: Setting guidelines in design; 2012; Tries, S., Nebel, S., Blanke, K.
- Boosting Web pick-up Rates by referring to Compliance Principles ; 2012; Falnes-Dalheim, E., Haraldsen, G., Sundvoll, A.
- Ebook readings jumps, print book reading declines; 2012; Rainie, L., Duggan, M.
- Developments and the impact of smart technology; 2012; Macer, T.
- How Should Debriefing Be Undertaken in Web-Based Studies? Findings From a Randomized Controlled Trial...; 2012; McCambridge, J., Kypri, K., Wilson, A.
- Better customer in sight in real time; 2012; Macdonald, E., Wilson, H. N., Konus, H.
- An experimental investigation of the effects of noncontingent and contingent incentives in recruiting...; 2012; Lavrakas, P. J., Dennis, J. M., Peugh, J., Shand-Lubbers, J., Lee, E., Peugh, J., Charlebois, O., Murakami...
- The Feasibility of Conducting a Web Survey Using Respondent Driven Sampling among Transgenders in the...; 2012; Kappelhof, J.
- The role of topic interest and topic salience in online panel web surveys.; 2012; Keusch, F.
- Multi-Language Multi-Continent B2B Community Panel: How B2B research can effectively span the world; 2012; Morden, M., Accomando, E.
- Can Survey Gaming Techniques Cross Continents? Examining cross cultural reactions to creative questioning...; 2012; Puleston, J.
- Rules of engagement: The war against poorly engaged respondents - guidelines for elimination; 2012; Gittelman, S. H., Trimarchi, E.
- WebSM Study: Survey software features overview ; 2012; Vehovar, V.; Cehovin, G.; Kavcic, L.; Lenar, J.
- Web Panels; 2012; Bethlehem, J., Biffignandi, S.
- Use of Response Propensities; 2012; Bethlehem, J., Biffignandi, S.
- Weighting Adjustment Techniques; 2012; Bethlehem, J., Biffignandi, S.
- The Problem of Self-Selection; 2012; Bethlehem, J.,Biffignandi, S.
- Designing a Web Survey Questionnaire; 2012; Bethlehem, J., Biffignandi, S.
- Examining Contexts-of-Use for Web-Based and Paper-Based Questionnaires; 2012; Hardré, P. L., Crowson, H. M., Xie, K.
- Probabilistic survey questions and incorrect answers: Retirement income replacement rates; 2012; van Santen, P., Alessie, R., Kalwij, A.
- Survey Quality; 2012; Lyberg, L. E.
- Unit Non-Response Due to Refusal; 2012; Stoop, I.
- Non-Response and Measurement Error; 2012; Billiet, J., Matsuo, H.
- An Overlooked Approach in Survey Research: Total Survey Error; 2012; Bautista, R.
- Data Quality in HIV/AIDS Web-Based Surveys: Handling Invalid and Suspicious Data; 2012; Bauermeister, J. A., Pingel, E., Zimmerman, M., Couper, M. P., Carballo-Diéguez, A., Strecher, V. J.
- Response rates in three opinion surveys performed through online questionnaires in the health setting...; 2012; Aerny Perreten, N., Domínguez-Berjón, M. F., Astray Mochales, J., Esteban-Vasallo, M. D., Blanco Ancos...
- Impact of Fixed Choice Design on Blockmodeling Outcomes; 2012; Znidarsic, A.
- The Mode of Invitation for Web Surveys; 2012; Bandilla, W., Couper, M. P., Kaczmirek, L.
- Disfluencies and Gaze Aversion in Unreliable Responses to Survey Questions; 2012; Schober, M. F., Conrad, F. G., Dijkstra, W., Ongena, Y. P.
- Evaluating Survey Questions: A Comparison of Methods; 2012; Yan, T., Kreuter, F., Tourangeau, R.
- When More Gets You Less: A Meta-Analysis of the Effect of Concurrent Web Options on Mail Survey Response...; 2012; Medway, R., Fulton, J.
- Reliable Online Social Network Data Collection; 2012; Abdesslem, F. B., Parris, I., Henderson, T.
- Enhancing Web Surveys With New HTML5 Input Types; 2012; Funke, F.