Web Survey Bibliography
We carried out two experiments to investigate how the shading of the options in a response scale affected the answers to the survey questions. The experiments were embedded in two web surveys, and they varied whether the two ends of the scale were represented by shades of the same or different hues. The experiments also varied the numerical labels for the scale points and examined responses to both unipolar scales (assessing frequency) and bipolar scales (assessing favorability). We predicted that the use of different hues would affect how respondents viewed the low end of the scale, making responses to that end seem more extreme than when the two ends were shades of the same hue. This hypothesis was based on the notion that respondents use various interpretive heuristics in assigning meaning to the visual features of survey questions. One such cue is visual similarity. When two options are similar in appearance, respondents will see them as conceptually closer than when they are dissimilar in appearance. The results were generally consistent with this prediction. When the end points of the scale were shaded in different hues, the responses tended to shift toward the high end of the scale, as compared to scales in which both ends of the scale were shaded inthe same hue. Though noticeable, this shift was less extreme than the similar shift produced when negative numbers were used to label one end of the scale; moreover, the effect of color was eliminated when each scale point had a verbal label. These findings suggest that respondents have difficulty using scales and pay attention even to incidental features of the response scales in interpreting the scale points.
Journal (full text)
Web Survey Bibliography - Online measurement (790)
- Clarifying Survey Questions; 2011; Redline, C. D.
- The place for mobile research? Multi-mode studies of major cultural events; 2011; Conry, S., Atkinson, S.
- How far is too far: Traditional, flash and gamification interfaces, and implications for the future...; 2011; Puleston, J., Malinoff, B.
- The Evolution of Edits in the Canadian Census of Population Online Questionnaires; 2011; Laroche, D.
- The Main Innovations of Data Editing and Imputation for the 2010 Italian Agricultural Census ; 2011; Bianchi, G., Lipsi, R. M., Ruocco, G., Salvatore, M. A.
- Wages worldwide results and measurement issues from the multi-country. WageIndicator web-survey ; 2011; van Klaveren, M., Tijdens, K.
- A Methodological Inference towards the Quantification of Technological Frames ; 2011; Cachia, E., Camilleri, P.
- 2nd WEBDATANET Meeting Amsterdam. Global Data Collecting; 2011; van Beveren, I.
- DIME-SHS; 2011; Lesnard, L.
- Calibrating Non-Probability Internet Samples with Probability Samples Using Early Adopter Characteristics...; 2011; DiSogra, C., Cobb, C. L., Chan, E., Dennis, J. M.
- Web Survey Methodology: Interface Design, Sampling and Statistical Inference; 2011; Couper, M. P.
- Dropout rates during completion of an occupation search tree in web-surveys; 2011; Tijdens, K.
- Ignoring the compatibility of online questionnaires may bias the psychological composition of your sample...; 2011; Funke, F.
- New data sources for statistics: Experiences at Statistics Netherlands; 2011; Daas, P., ten Bosch, O., de Blois, C., Hoekstra, R., Roos, M.
- Further research on the design of complex grids; 2011; Couper, M. P., Tourangeau, R.Conrad, F. G., Zhang, C.
- Interactive carrots and sticks to improve data quality; 2011; Conrad, F. G., Tourangeau, R., Couper, M. P., Zhang, C.
- Optimum Blending of Panels and Social Network Respondents; 2011; Gittelman, S. H., Portner, A.
- Making the move to mobile Apps-based research: A case study in the evaluation and implementation of...; 2011; Graham, P., Conry, S.
- Once a 'Bad' Respondent, Always a 'Bad' Respondent - How to Identify and Exclude '...; 2011; Suresh, N.
- Dealing with the Effects of Panelist Experience; 2011; Burdein, I.
- Results from Real-Time Data Collection (RTD) vs. Data from Traditional Panelists: Is it valid to combine...; 2011; Pingitore, G., Witten, S., Walker, A., Seldin, D., Ellrodt, R., Muns, N., Parks, C., Serrato, C.
- Widening the Net: A Comparison of Online Intercept and Access Panel Sampling; 2011; Bakken, D. G., Nawani, R.
- Does choice of vendor make a difference in respondent validation and how does it impact the overall...; 2011; Courtright, M., Miller, C.
- Probably the Best Bias in the World?; 2011; Dent, T.
- The development of the KubeMatrix™ as a mobile app for Market Research Online Communities; 2011; Birks, D. F., Wilson, D.
- The Research-Data-Centre in Research-Data-Centre Approach: A First Step Towards Decentralised International...; 2011; Bender, S., Heining, J.
- First Equals Most Important? Order Effects in Vignette- Based Measurement; 2011; Auspurg, K., Jaeckle, A.
- Using Online Surveys to Conduct Jury Research; 2011; Edelman, B.
- The “Frequency Divide” on Web Surveys: Opinions, Behaviours and Demographics Differences...; 2011; Reis, E., Vicente, P.
- Researching Personal Information on the Public Web - Methods and Ethics; 2011; Wilkinson, D., Thelwall, M.
- Apples and oranges: does a web survey produce similar results to social media tracking?; 2011; Bourque, C., Hobbs, R., Hilaire, D. S.
- The influence of Social Support and Personal Networks on Doctoral Student Performance; 2011; Hlebec, V., Kogovsek, T., Ferligoj, A.
- From Busy Bees to Science Geeks and Party Animals: A Typology of Slovenian Doctoral Students; 2011; Hlebec, V., Kogovsek, T., Ferligoj, A.
- PhD Students’ Research Group Social Capital in Two Countries: A Clustering Approach with Duocentred...; 2011; Coenders, G., Coromina, L., Ferligoj, A., Guia, J.
- Preface; 2011; Coenders, G., Doreian, P.
- Preferences, intentions, and expectation violations: A large-scale experiment with a representative...; 2011; Bellemare. C., Kroeger, S., van Soest, A.
- Twitter mood predicts the stock market.; 2011; Bollen, J., Mao, H., Zeng, X.-J.
- Exploring Health-related Experiences and Access to Care: Differences between Online and Telephone Survey...; 2011; Doty, M. M., Peugh, J., Shand-Lubbers, J.
- The Impact of “Forgiving” Introductions on the Reporting of Sensitive Behavior in Surveys...; 2011; Peter, J., Valkenburg, P. M.
- Surveying the General Public over the Internet Using Address-Based Sampling and Mail Contact Procedures...; 2011; Messer, B. L., Dillman, D. A.
- The power of qualitative research in the era of social media; 2011; Branthwaite, A., Patterson, S.
- E-Census 2011 Portugal: implementation and results of the Pilot Survey; 2011; Vicente, P., Rosa, A., Reis, E.
- Sampling v. Scale: An investigation the tension between convenience sampling, response rates, probability...; 2011; Garland, P.
- Using Amazon's Mechanical Turk for the recruitment of participants in Internet-based research; 2011; Reips, U. -D., Buffardi, L., Kuhlmann, T.
- Should we use the progress bar in online surveys? A meta-analysis of experiments manipulating progress...; 2011; Callegaro, M., Yang, Y., Villar, A.
- In the market for an online panel? What clients need to know; 2011; Hartmann, S.
- How Procter & Gamble worked to develop online data quality guidelines; 2011; Gloeckler, D.
- Web/Cloud Based CATI Using queXS; 2011; Zammit, A.
- Developing Paradata Tools to Maximize Call Center Conversion Rates; 2011; Heinrich, T., Pittman, J., Abu, K.
- e-Collection at Statistics Canada; 2011; Faid, M.

