Web Survey Bibliography
In Germany, Stober et al. (1999, 2001) presented evidence for the validity of the SDS-17, a new measure of social desirability bias. In the current investigation, three experiments (n = 800) assessed the SDS-17’s validity in the US environment. In all conditions SDS-17 scores correlated highly with Marlowe–Crowne scores. In Study 1, a group administration of a paper and pencil booklet, SDS-17 scores of 327 college students were higher under Fake Good than Standard conditions, and both were higher than scores in the Honest condition. Study 2, an online survey of a demographically diverse adult sample (n = 257), showed that the increase in SDS-17 scores under Fake Good conditions occurs also in a Web surveynext term and that SDS-17 scores were unrelated to one’s demographic profile. Study 3, a group administration to 216 college students, revealed again that scores under Fake Good were higher than those under Standard administration and that SDS-17 scores correlated more highly with the Impression Management than with the Self-Deception subscales of the BIDR. The SDS-17 appeared valid for the US environment as a measure of socially desirable responding. The evidence, however, encourages its further assessment as an index of social desirability bias per se.
ScienceDirect (full text)
Web survey bibliography - Marketing/business (336)
- Validity of the SDS-17 measure of social desirability in the American context; 2006; Blake, B. F., Valdiserri, J., Neuendorf, K., Nemeth, J.
- Comparing the Generalizability of Online and Mail Surveys in Cross-National Service Quality Research; 2006; Deutskens, E., de Jong, K., de Ruyter, K., Wetzels, M.
- The professional respondent problem in online panel surveys today; 2005; Fulgoni, G.
- Workaround: Site’s surveys beat pop-up blockers, yield responses; 2005; Arnold, C.
- An assessment of measurement invariance between online and mail surveys ; 2005; Deutskens, E., de Ruyter, K., Wetzels, M.
- Web Versus Paper Questionnares: A Design and Functionality - Comparison; 2005; Jones, Ja., Fraser, C., Dowling, Z.
- An Empirical Evaluation of Three Web Survey Design Principles; 2005; Healey, B., Macpherson, T., Kuijten, B.
- In my opinion; 2005; Haley, F.
- Meta-Analyses on Contingent versus Unconditional Incentives; 2005; Goeritz, A.
- An experiment in call scheduling; 2004; Cunningham, P., Martin, D., Brick, J. M.
- Web Surveys for Electronic Commerce: A Review of the Literature; 2004; Huang, H.-M., Liaw, S. S.
- A Comparison of Objective Characteristics and User Perception of Web Sites; 2004; Lee, S.-J., Lee, W.-N., Kim, H., Stout, P. A.
- The Effect of Billboards within the Gaming Environment; 2004; Chaney, I. M., Lin, K.-H., Chaney, J.
- The impact of material incentives on response quantity, response quality, sample composition, survey...; 2004; Goeritz, A.
- Identifying and Reducing Response Burdens in Internet Business Surveys; 2004; Haraldsen, G.
- The Internet: Marketing Researcher's Panacea or Pandora's Box?; 2004; Gurney, P. M., Chambers, E., Grant, L., Shah, S., Sullivan, M. P.
- Developing automated e-survey and control tools: an application in industrial management; 2004; Scornavacca Jr., E., Becker, J. L., Barnes, S.
- Survey Mode Preferences of Business Respondents; 2004; Tarnai, J., Paxon, M. C.
- Cutting Market Research Costs with On-Site Surveys; 2004; Dysart, J.
- Web-based data collection; 2003; Tourangeau, R.
- Response order effects – how do people read?; 2003; Duffy, B.
- Internet Marketing Research: Recources and Techniques; 2003; Forrest, E.
- Are you talking to the right people?; 2003; Davis, H.
- Be prepared; 2003; Fitzgerald, A.
- Online sample -- can you trust it?; 2003; Maginnis, C.
- Internet surveys: limits and beyond limits; 2003; Mititelu, C.
- Web site design benchmarking within industry groups; 2003; Kim, S.-E., Shaw, T., Schneider, H.
- Identifying key factors affecting consumer purchase behavior in an online shopping context; 2003; Park, C.-H., Kim, Y.-G.
- Web Survey's Hidden Hazards; 2003; Morrel Samuels, P.
- On-line qualitative market research: Interviewing the world at a fingertip; 2002; Scholl, N., Mulders, S., Drent, R.
- Trends in marketing research and their impact on survey research sampling; 2002; Anich, B.
- Predicting the future of consumer panels; 2002; Wansink, B., Sudman, S.
- From Paper-and-Pencil to Screen-and-Keyboard: An Empirical Assessment of Equivalence Issues in Internet...; 2002; Deutskens, E., de Ruyter, K., Wetzels, M.
- Selecting a consumer panel service; 2002; Sudman, S., Wansink, B.
- Compare and contrast; 2002; Kindig, L.
- Software Review: CAVI from OpinionOne; 2002; Macer, T.
- Supplier Side: Survey programming integration; 2002; Mitrano, M.
- Drawing a few from many; 2002; Fitzgerald, A.
- If given the choice; 2002; Allison, J., O'Konis, C.
- At my own pace in my own place; 2002; Downes-Le Guin, T.
- Privacy, please; 2002; Mack, B.
- My opinion counts; 2002; Solomon, M. B.
- Qualitatively Speaking: Online focus groups...here today, not gone tomorrow; 2002; Yoffie, A. J.
- Net research suffers due to failed promise; 2002; Tortorello, N. J.
- Using phone methods in a digital age; 2002; Fitzgerald, A.
- Effect of trust on customer acceptance of Internet banking; 2002; Suh, B., Han, I.
- Subscale distance and item clustering effects in self-administered surveys: A new metric; 2001; Bradlow, E. T., Fitzsimons, G. J.
- When money doesn't talk; 2001; Funk, S., McCallum-Keeler, G.
- Reaching IT professionals: online vs. telephone interviewing; 2001; Van Houten, B.
- A comparison of Internet and mail survey methodologies; 2001; Medlin, B., Whitten, D.