Web Survey Bibliography
The increasing use of data collection online (instead of off line) creates a need for research on the factors that affect compliance and data quality in web based surveys. In general, surveys should be clean, concise and appealing (Dillman, 2000) so that participants’ motivation to complete the survey increases or at least not decreases over the course of the survey. Intuitively, one would argue that a progress bar is such a motivating factor: it gives the participant insight into the length of time the survey will take, and in particular a sense that the survey will not ask for too much of their time. Nevertheless, the few studies that have tried to corroborate this hypothesis found mixed results. Both Couper et al. (2001) and Crawford et al. (2001) even found a negative effect of the existence of a progress bar on completion rates, although there were some methodological issues that may have been the reason for this surprising finding (as they mention themselves, Couper et al. did not control for download times and Crawford et al. may have made a miscalculation in the prediction of the remaining questions). Recent research by Boehme (2003) shows no effect of the progress bar on completion, but does find some effects when comparing progress bars that are either degressive or progressive. We continue this line of research, focusing on the length of the survey as an intervening variable. Using a sample of 3556 respondents of the Dutch PanelClix online panel, we compare the effects of different kinds of progress bars on survey compliance and data quality. We indeed find that the length of the survey is an important factor when it comes to determining the usefulness of progress indicators. Boehme, R. (2003) Fragebogeneffekte bei Online-Befragungen. Master’s Thesis in Communication Science. University of Dresden. Couper, M. P., Traugott, M. W. & Lamias, M. J. (2001). Web survey design and administration. Public Opinion Quarterly, 65 (2), 230-253. Crawford, S. D., Couper, M. P. & Lamias, M. J. (2001). Web surveys: Perceptions of burden. Social Science Computer Review, 19 (2), 146-162. Dillman, D. A. (2000). Mail and internet surveys: The tailored design method (2nd edition). New York: Wiley.
Conference homepage (abstract)
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.