Web Survey Bibliography
Data collected through Web surveys, in general, do not adopt traditional probability-based sample designs. Therefore, the inferential techniques used for probability samples may not be guaranteed to be correct for Web surveys without adjustment, and estimates from these surveys are likely to be biased. However, research on the statistical aspect of Web surveys is lacking relative to other aspects of Web surveys. Propensity score adjustment (PSA) has been suggested as an alternative for statistically surmounting inherent problems, namely nonrandomized sample selection, in volunteer Web surveys. However, there has been a minimal amount of evidence for its applicability and performance, and the implications are not conclusive. Moreover, PSA does not take into account problems occurring from uncertain coverage of sampling frames in volunteer panel Web surveys. This study attempted to develop alternative statistical estimation methods for volunteer Web surveys and evaluate their effectiveness in adjusting biases arising
from nonrandomized selection and unequal coverage in volunteer Web surveys. Specifically, the proposed adjustment used a two-step approach. First, PSA was utilized as a method to correct for nonrandomized sample selection, and secondly calibration adjustment was used for uncertain coverage of the sampling frames. The investigation found that the proposed estimation methods showed a potential for reducing the selection and coverage bias in estimates from volunteer panel Web surveys. The combined two-step adjustment not only reduced bias but also mean square errors to a greater degree than each individual adjustment. While the findings from this study may shed some light on Web survey data utilization, there are additional areas to be considered and explored. First, the proposed adjustment decreased bias but did not completely remove it. The adjusted estimates showed a larger variability than the unadjusted ones. The adjusted estimator was no longer in the linear form, but an appropriate variance estimator has not been developed yet. Finally, naively applying the variance estimator for linear statistics highly overestimated the variance, resulting in understating the efficiency of the survey estimates.
DRUM (full text)
Web Survey Bibliography - Reports, seminars (266)
- SDSC Announces scalable, high-performance data storage cloud; 2011
- New Esomar survey on use of cookies and tracking technologies; 2011
- Mobile, webmail, desktops: Where are we viewing email now?; 2011
- Knowledge Networks answers to ESOMAR's "25 Questions to Help Research Buyers"; 2011
- Just published: Forrester Wave™ of enterprise feedback management satisfaction and loyalty solutions...; 2011; McInnes, A.
- ISER working paper 2011-31. Is it a good idea to optimise question format for mode of data collection...; 2011; Nicolaas, G., Campanelli, P., Hope, S., Jaeckle, A., Lynn, P.
- Internet access quarterly update 2011 Q1; 2011
- Households with Computers, Telephone Subscriptions, and Internet Access, Selected Years, 1997 - 2010; 2011
- GRE® program announces big benefits and big savings for GRE® test takers worldwide; 2011
- Google and Kantar develop measurement panel; 2011
- Global market research 2011; 2011
- Eurobarometer Special surveys: EB75.1 E-Communications Household Survey. Special Eurobarometer 362; 2011
- ESOMAR AND CASRO submission to the W3C tracking protection working group - Market research techniques...; 2011
- Causes of survey incompletes: Why panelists say they abandon surveys; 2011; Henning, J.
- Beyond data stability: Rising above quality concerns; 2011
- Background - QSOAP; 2011
- Standard Definitions: Final Dispositions of Case Codes and Outcome Rates for Surveys 2011; 2011
- Web Survey Methodology: Interface Design, Sampling and Statistical Inference; 2011; Couper, M. P.
- Effect of interview modes on measurement of identity; 2011; Nandi, A., Platt, L.
- Maintaining Cross-Sectional Representativeness in a Longitudinal General Population Survey ; 2011; Lynn, P.
- Understanding Society Innovation Panel Wave 3: Results from Methodological Experiments; 2011; Burton, J., Budd, S., Gilbert, E., Jaeckle, A., McFall, S., Uhrig, S.C. N.
- The Effect of a Mixed Mode Wave on Subsequent Attrition in a Panel Survey: Evidence from the Understanding...; 2011; Lynn, P.
- In the Face of Declining Budgets: The Student Experience at Washington State University ; 2011; Allen, T., Dillman, D. A., Garza, B., Millar, M. M.
- Anchoring vignettes: response consistency and order effects; 2011; Kapteyn, A., Smith, J. P., van Soest, A., Vonkova, H.
- Framing Effects and Expected Social Security Claiming Behavior; 2011; Brown, J., Kapteyn, A., Mitchell, O. S.
- The psychology or survey response. An ASA webinar; 2010; Tourangeau, R.
- Site-intercpet survey best practices; 2010; Henning, J.
- Real ID. State of The Art Representative and Repeatable Online Samples. Behaviorally Profiled Respondents...; 2010; Gittelman, S. H., Trimarchi, E.
- Overview of data collection methodology; 2010
- Libraries nationwide receiving ALA-APA Library Salary Survey Invitation; 2010; Grady, J.
- Global market research 2010; 2010
- Ethical principles of psychologists and code of conduct; 2010
- Ekos' observation of MRIA study - Canadian online panels: similar or different?; 2010
- Demographics of mechanical Turk. Ceder working papers; 2010; Ipeirotis, P. G.
- Broadband adoption and use in America; 2010; Horrigan, J.
- Continuity and Innovation in the Design of Understanding Society: the UK Household Longitudinal Study...; 2010; Laurie, H.
- Weighting Strategy for Understanding Society; 2010; Lynn, P., Kaminska, O.
- Lessons from a Randomised Experiment with Mixed-Mode Designs for a Household Panel Survey; 2010; Lynn, P., Uhrig, S.C. N., Burton, J.
- Understanding Society Innovation Panel Wave 2: Results from Methodological Experiments ; 2010; Burton, J., Laurie, H., Uhrig, S.C. N.
- Codebook and explanatory note on the WageIndicator dataset ; 2010; Tijdens, K., van Zijl, S., Hughie-Williams, M., van Klaveren, M., Steinmetz, S.
- Online Survey Research in the Work-Family Field: Basic Concepts and Definitions; 2010; Lambert, A. D.
- Choosing Between Telephone and Online for Survey Data Collection ; 2010; Baker, R. P.
- Using KnowledgePanel® to Improve the Sample Representativeness and Accuracy of Opt-in Panel Data...; 2010; Dennis, J. M., Peugh, J., Graham, P.
- AAPOR Report on Online Panels; 2010; Baker, R. P., Blumberg, S. J., Brick, J. M. et. al.
- A comparison of surveys using different modes of data collection; 2010; Revilla, M., Saris, W. E.
- Using Address Based Sampling to Survey the General Public by Mail vs. 'Web plus Mail'; 2010; Messer, B. L., Dillman, D. A.
- MarketTools TrueSample; 2009
- ISO 26362 Access panels in market, opinion, and social research-Vocabulary and service requirements; 2009
- Global market research 2009; 2009
- Exploring mode effects in a panel survey of new businesses; 2009; Santos, B., DesRoches, D.

