Web Survey Bibliography
Title Does the Collection of Ego-Centered Network Data on the Web reduce the Data Quality? An Experimental Comparison of online versus offline Data Collection
Access date 21.09.2006
Abstract We analyze whether differences in kind and quality of ego-centered network data that were collected on the web compared to data collected with the help of an interviewer are caused by the different data collection procedures. The quality of web survey data has been analyzed (Couper 2000) for more or less standard questions. The collection of ego-centered network data, however, is notoriously more difficult than the collection of other survey data because it faces the respondent with a more complex answering task. Until now, we know that the wording of the items influences the measured size of the network and the drop out rate (Lozar Manfreda, Vehovar & Hlebec 2004). Also, it is known that when respondents can freely choose between a web survey and an interview, then those who choose the web survey have a higher drop out rate and more missing values (Snijders & Matzat 2005). However, we do not know whether the web survey itself reduces the data quality or whether the reduction can be explained by other unobserved differences between the groups. In our study university researchers of different disciplines at a Dutch university (n=270) were randomly divided into two groups. They either filled out ego-centered data through a web questionnaire or were probed about their network in a personalized interview. Ego-centered network data collection makes use of so-called \"name generators\" that are both hard to explain properly and moreover give the respondent a special opportunity to shorten the answer procedure. For this reason, interviewers are often deemed critical in the proper collection of ego-centered network data. Our analysis provides a strong test of whether the collection of network data through the Internet reduces the data quality. One could argue that respondents who are not interviewed in person are tempted to answer in a much more time saving manner than other respondents, and are moreover more likely to make mistakes or simply quit. We focus on drop out rates, the number of missing values, the size and density of the ego-centered networks, as well as other properties of the networks. The paper presents the results of the hypotheses testing.
Access/Direct link Conference homepage (abstract)
Bibliographic typeConferences, workshops, tutorials, presentations
Year of publication2006
Full text availabilityNon-existant
Web Survey Bibliography - General Online Research Conference (GOR) 2006 (29)
- Cash Lotteries as Incentives in Online Panels; 2006; Goeritz, A.
- ‘Low social presence’ in web surveys: advantage or disadvantage or both? An experiment; 2006; Taddicken, M.
- How much individualisation does a conjoint survey need? - Experiences from an online experiment; 2006; Tuschl, S., Morasch, N.
- The effect of different kinds of progress bars on online survey compliance and data quality; 2006; van der Horst, W., Snijders, C., Matzat, U.
- The impact of persuasion strategies on the response rate in online surveys: Incentives, foot-in-the-...; 2006; Verheyen, C.; Schuebel, C., Moser, K.
- Online visual landscape assessment using Internet survey techniques in landscape planning and environmental...; 2006; Roth, M.
- Image Impact Evaluation - A new methodological approach with virtual test environments; 2006; Selke, S., Fetzner, D.
- Air refresheners online? Validity check of an Internet online sample using external reference data; 2006; Starsetzki, T., Lehmann, G.
- Online Evaluation Survey; 2006; Strzoda, C.
- Online Survey Response Patterns; 2006; Sutton A., Hopkins Burke, K.
- Does the Collection of Ego-Centered Network Data on the Web reduce the Data Quality? An Experimental...; 2006; Matzat, U., Snijders, C.
- Optimizing open-ended questions in online questionnaires for measuring price perception and willingness...; 2006; Melles, T., Ellers, G.
- Ranking vs. Rating in an online Environment; 2006; Neubarth, W.
- Online Recruiting on Internet pages New Solution for On Exit Recruitment on WebSites; 2006; Otto, P.
- Online Conjoint Analysis: The faster, the worse?; 2006; Puetzfeld, S., Melles, T.
- Web survey on transition from university to work: measuring the marginal effect mode; 2006; D'Agostino, A., Quintano, C., Castellano, R.
- Qualitative research online: Self-reported pros and cons of being chat-interviewed online with web cameras...; 2006; Davidovich, U., Uhr, H.
- Visual Analogue Scales: Non-linear Data Categorization by Transformation with Reduced Extremes; 2006; Funke, F., Reips, U. -D.
- Response Biases in Online Surveys; 2006; Galesic, M., Bosnjak, M.
- Using Instant Messaging for Internet-based interviews; 2006; Goeritz, A., Stieger, S.
- A online-offline method comparison based on quasi-experimental data from two surveys to family stress...; 2006; Haenggi, Y., Heldner, C.
- Hybrid Methods in Market Research - Learnings and Limits; 2006; Helmold, D., Kohlmann, U.
- The impact of visualization of question types and screen pages on the answering behaviour in online...; 2006; Hemsing, W., Hellwig, O.
- Specific Demands of Longitudinal Online-Surveys; 2006; Kahnwald, N., Koehler, T.
- A Comparison of the validity of a paper based and an online Conjoint Analysis; 2006; Klein, A., Scheffold, K.
- Determinants of Response Rates of Online Surveys - The Anita Effect - Results of a Joint Project; 2006; Althoff, S., Greif, V., Griel, B., Batinic, B.
- Technical opportunities for automation and integration of online surveys in business processes; 2006; Batinic, B.
- Personality traits and participation in an online access panel; 2006; Galesic, M., Bosnjak, M.