Web Survey Bibliography
Background: Research in quality of life traditionally relies on paper-and-pencil questionnaires. Easy access to the Internet has inspired a number of studies that use the Internet to collect questionnaire data. However, Internet-based data collection may differ from traditional methods with respect to response rate and data quality as well as the validity and reliability of the involved scales.
Objective: We used a randomized design to compare a paper-and-pencil questionnaire with an Internet version of the same questionnaire with respect to differences in response rate and completeness of data.
Methods: Women referred for mammography at a Danish public hospital from September 2004 to April 2005, aged less than 67 years and without a history of breast cancer, were eligible for the study. The women received the invitation to participate along with the usual letter from the Department of Radiology. A total of 533 women were invited to participate. They were randomized to receive either a paper questionnaire, with a prepaid return envelope, or a guideline on how to fill in the Internet-based version online. The questionnaire consisted of 17 pages with a total of 119 items, including the Short Form-36, Multidimensional Fatigue Inventory-20, Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale, and questions regarding social status, education level, occupation, and access to the Internet. Nonrespondents received a postal reminder giving them the option of filling out the other version of the questionnaire.
Results: The response rate before the reminder was 17.9% for the Internet group compared to 73.2% for the paper-and-pencil group (risk difference 55.3%, P < .001). After the reminder, when the participant could chose between versions of the questionnaire, the total response rate for the Internet and paper-and-pencil group was 64.2% and 76.5%, respectively (risk difference 12.2%, P = .002). For the Internet version, 97.8% filled in a complete questionnaire without missing data, while 63.4% filled in a complete questionnaire for the paper-and-pencil version (risk difference 34.5%, P < .001).
Conclusions: The Internet version of the questionnaire was superior with respect to completeness of data, but the response rate in this population of unselected patients was low. The general population has yet to become more familiar with the Internet before an online survey can be the first choice of researchers, although it is worthwhile considering within selected populations of patients as it saves resources and provides more complete answers. An Internet version may be combined with the traditional version of a questionnaire, and in follow-up studies of patients it may be more feasible to offer Internet versions.
Journal of medical internet research(full text)
Web survey bibliography (4086)
- Solicitation by e-Mail and solicitor's status: A field study of social research influence on the...; 2002; Gueguen, N., Jacob, C.
- Trends in marketing research and their impact on survey research sampling; 2002; Anich, B.
- Standards questionnaire format; 2002
- Psychological reactions to terrorist attacks. Findings from the national study of American's reactions...; 2002; Thalji, L., Schlenger, W. E., Caddell, J. M., Ebert, L., Jordan, B. K., Rourke, K. M., Willson, D.,...
- Predicting the future of consumer panels; 2002; Wansink, B., Sudman, S.
- New approaches to assessing opinion: The prospects for electronic mail surveys; 2002; Best, S. J., Krueger, B. S.
- More than a thousand words? Visual cues and visual knowledge; 2002; Prior, M.
- E-Research: Ethics, security, design, and control in psychological research on the Internet; 2002; Banaji, M., Greenwald, A., Nosek, B.
- Demand characteristics in the laboratory and the clinic: Conversations and collaborations with subjects...; 2002; Kihlstrom, J. F.
- Bracketing effects in categorized survey questions and the measurement of economic quantities; 2002; Winter, J.
- A D-minus for computer exams; 2002; Mayfield, K.
- The use of incentives to reduce nonresponse household surveys; 2002; Singer, E.
- Ethnical guidelines for internet research; 2002
- WEXTOR: A Web-based tool for generating and visualizing experimental designs and procedures; 2002; Reips, U.-D., Neuhaus, C.
- WeXtor 2.5: Develop, manage, and visualize experimental designs and procedures; 2002; Reips, U.-D., Blumer, T., Neuhaus, C.
- Studying hate crime with the Internet: What makes racist advocate racial violence?; 2002; Glaser, J., Dixit, J., Green, D. P.
- Cognitive processes when answering online questionnaires; 2002; Fuchs, M.
- Using client side paradata to evaluate respondent behavior in Web surveys; 2002; Heerwegh, D.
- Doec propensity score weighting work for Web Surveys; 2002; Forsman, G., Varedian, M.
- Visual design issues in Web surveys; 2002; Couper, M. P.
- Results from cognitive interviews of nsf earned doctorate Web survey; 2002; Altheimer, I., Dillman, D. A.
- Conducting Survey Research Through an Enhanced Online Web Survey Procedure ; 2002; Theuri, P. M., Turner, L. D.
- Community views on crime and policing: Survey mode effects on bias in community surveys; 2002; Hennigan, K. M., Maxson, C. L., Sloane, D., Ranney, M.
- From Paper-and-Pencil to Screen-and-Keyboard: An Empirical Assessment of Equivalence Issues in Internet...; 2002; Deutskens, E., de Ruyter, K., Wetzels, M.
- Survey of Doctors' Experience of Patients Using the Internet; 2002; Potts, H. W. W., Wyatt, J. C., Pagerey, P. D.
- Libraries and desktop storage options: results of a Web-based survey; 2002; Hendricks, A., Wang, Ji.
- The local/global decision in Internet research; 2002; Crawford, S. D., Jones, S., Rowen, C.
- Hard Choices, Easy Answers: Values, Information, and American Public Opinion; 2002; Alvarez, M. R., Brehm, J.
- Evaluation of Web Survey Data Collection Systems; 2002; Crawford, S. D.
- Online surveys with simple random samples for large populations; 2002; Kreuels, B.
- Sampling problems in research on personal Homepages; 2002; Marcus, B., Machilek, F., Schuetz, A., Kilian, C.
- 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.
- Humbug, science, survey research; 2002; Litman, J.
- 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.
- Multi-mode research dos and don'ts; 2002; Hogg, A.
- 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.
- Social desirability and self-disclosure online: Integrating media effects with user characteristics; 2002
- Social desirable responding and age on the Internet: older participants in online studies show a higher...; 2002; Reips, U.-D., Stoeber, J., Hahn, A.
- Time Measurement And Pre-testing In On-line-Questionnaires; 2002; Mueller, J., Reimer, M.
- Statistical Data Validation in Web Instruments:An Empirical Study; 2002; Peytchev, A., Petrova, E. A.
- Attitudes of Business Faculty Towards Two Methods of Collecting Teaching Evaluations: Paper vs. Online...; 2002; Dommeyer, C. J., Baum, P., Chapman, K. S., Hanna, R. W.
- Introduction: Psychology and the Internet; 2002; Taylor, J.