Web Survey Bibliography
Research in the field of mobile surveys is still in an early stage. While Web-Surveys amount to about 21% of all surveys in Germany, mobile surveys are not listed separately in the statistics yet. By contrast about 73% of the general population use mobile phones and only about 60% have internet access. Therefore the potential of mobile interviews is very high, as soon as this survey technique is applicable for the general population.
Similar to Web-Survey Research a few years ago, there is no standard for mobile research to date. Until today mobile phones served to send pre-notices for web-surveys (Bosnjak, et al.; in press), but were also used for online questionnaires directly via mobile internet. Displaying questionnaires within a Java application run offline on mobile phones, or conducting entire surveys by sending many SMS-messages to and fro are current applications of mobile research, too. As in stationary online research, it is expected that some survey methods will prevail while other methods vanish, just like sending word questionnaires by e-mail has become very uncommon.
This paper presents results of a qualitative comparative study processed with about 40 experts of the mobile telecommunication market. Including a preceding test of both methods, the study compares the mobile survey variants online and offline. This leads to findings on the following topics: Usability, estimation of public acceptance, useful applications for both methods as well as future expectations. The study is endorsed by data from an online case study. The findings of the presented paper will soon acquire very high relevance for both commercial and academic research.
Die Forschung zu mobilen Online-Befragungen befindet sich derzeit noch in einem frühen Stadium. Im Vergleich zu Web-Befragungen, die aktuell ca. 21% der Befragungen ausmachen, werden Mobile-Studien aktuell noch nicht separat in der Statistik aufgeführt. Die Verbreitung von Mobiltelefonen übertrifft jedoch mit einer Abdeckungsrate von ca. 73% deutlich die der Online-Zugänge (ca. 60%). Folglich liegt das Potential für mobile Online-Befragungen sehr hoch, wird diese Befragungstechnik für die Allgemeinbevölkerung einsetzbar.
Ähnlich wie noch vor einigen Jahren in der Online-Forschung, bestehen derzeit keine Standards für mobile Befragungen. Mobile Endgeräte wurden im Bereich der Umfrageforschung bisher dazu verwendet, SMS Vorankündigungen für Online-Befragungen zu versenden (Bosnjak, et al.; in Druck), direkt online im mobilen Internet zu befragen, Fragebögen offline zur Beantwortung anzuzeigen (Anwendung in Java) und komplette Befragungen über den Versand vieler einzelner SMS durchzuführen. Es ist zu erwarten, dass sich einige Befragungsmethoden durchsetzen, während andere wieder verschwinden, wie dies z.B. für E-Mail-Befragungen im stationären Online-Bereich der Fall war.
Der hier vorgestellte Beitrag präsentiert die Ergebnisse einer qualitativen Vergleichsstudie, die mit ca. 40 Experten des Mobilkommunikationsmarktes durchgeführt wurde. Die Studie kontrastiert die beiden Mobil-Erhebungsvarianten online und offline gegeneinander, nachdem die Befragten jeweils einen Nutzungstest abgeschlossen haben. Daraus ergeben sich Erkenntnisse zu den folgenden Themenbereichen: Usability, Akzeptanzeinschätzung, sinnvolle Anwendungsszenarien für beide Ansätze sowie zu Zukunftserwartungen. Die Ergebnisse dieser Studie werden durch Kennzahlen aus einer online durchgeführten Fallstudie ergänzt. Die Erkenntnisse der vorgestellten Studien sind sowohl für die kommerzielle, als auch für die akademische Forschung in naher Zukunft von großer Relevanz.
General online research (GOR) 2008 (abstract)
Web Survey Bibliography (6374)
- The impact of gender in e-mailed survey invitations; 2009; Derham, P.
- Using interactive technology to improve online questionnaire design; 2009; Chen, T., Estrin, D.
- How Web 2.0 made a long survey more palatable; 2009; Hebard, A. J.
- Faster than a speeding survey: Part II: The physician's perspective; 2009; Maciolek, T., Palish, J.
- Faster than a speeding survey: Part I: Rules of the road for online research with physicians; 2009; Maciolek, T., Palish, J.
- An examination of strategies for panel-blending; 2009; Fallig, M. A., Allen, D.
- How do respondent behaviors and online sample quality affect measures of ad performance?; 2009; Bruzzone, D.
- The value of consistency auditing of online panels; 2009; Gittelmam, S. H., Trimarchi, E.
- 10 ways to keep your panel respondents happy; 2009; Hardy, N.
- Survey says: new tools aim to ensure the integrity of online surveys. ; 2009; Quenqua, D.
- Standard Definitions: Final Dispositions of Case Codes and Outcome Rates for Surveys 2009; 2009; The American Association for Public Opinion Research
- College Experiences Survey: Methodological Summary. Final Report; 2009; DesRoches, D., Hall, J. W., Santos, B.
- Survey Platform: A Factor Influencing Online Survey Delivery and Response Rate ; 2009; Nair, C. S., Adams, P.
- Conference interpreters and their self-representation: A worldwide web-based survey ; 2009; Zwischenberger, C.
- What are They Asking Me? A Web Survey Experiment on Question Clarity and Measurement Error; 2009; Faas, T., Kaczmirek, L., Lenzner, A.
- Some Practical Issues in Cell Phone Interviewing from a Phone Room Perspective; 2009; Best, J., Hugick, L
- Measurement Error in Cell Phone Surveys; 2009; Kennedy, C., Everett, S. E., Traugott, M. W.
- Improving Response Rates on Both Landline and Cell Surveys Through the Strategic Use of Caller ID; 2009; Dayton, J. J., Burns, E., Levinson, A., Freedner, N., Hannah, K., Tarallo, B.
- Cell Phone Mainly and Cell Phone Mostly: A Comparison of Two Approaches to Dual Frame Cell Phone and...; 2009; Boyle, J., Cantor, J.
- PDA vs. Computer Web Survey Respondents; 2009; Stapleton, C
- Using Audio Computer-Assisted Self-Interviewing and Interactive Voice Response to Measure Elder Mistreatment...; 2009; Beach, S., Schultz, M., Degenholtz, H., Castle, N., Rosen, J., Fox, A., Meisel, A., Morycz, R.
- Exploring Inherent Differences Between CARI and Non-CARI Interviews; 2009; Sage, A., Keating, M.
- The Use of Advance Contact, Monetary Incentives, and Lotteries to Increase Response Rates in a Web Survey...; 2009; Stevenson, J., Dykema, J., Day, D., Bonham, V., Sellers, S.
- The Effect of Email Invitation Subject Title and Text on Online Survey Completion Rates in Internet...; 2009; Kruse, Y., Thomas, M., Nukulkij, P., Callegaro, M.
- Words, Numbers and Visual Heuristics in Web Surveys: Is There a Hierarchy of Importance?; 2009; Toepoel, V., Dillman, D. A.
- Web of Caring: Development of Web-Survey Best Practices; 2009; Ballou, J., Roff, B.
- Cell-Only Adults Versus Cell-Mostly Adults: Does It Make a Difference in the Results; 2009; Battaglia, M. P., Frankel, M. R., Balluz, L. S.
- Shifting Samples: The Impact of Wireless Substitution on National Estimates in RDD Surveys; 2009; Hannah, K.
- The Coverage Bias of Mobile Web Surveys; 2009; Fuchs, M.
- Refined or Biased Opinions? Examining Self-Selected Participation in Deliberation and Post-Survey in...; 2009; Wang, R., Siu, A.
- Mechanisms of Nonresponse in Cell Phone Surveys; 2009; Kennedy, C., Everett, S. E., Traugott, M. W.
- The Introduction of a Cell Phone Oversample to the Ohio Family Health Survey: Covering the Undercovered...; 2009; Duffy, T., Iachan, R., Bausch, S., Muzzy, S., ZuWallack, R. S.
- Examining the Relationship Between Survey Response Elicitation Efforts, Response Motivation, and Satisficing...; 2009; Lee, G., Rao, K.
- An Experiment in Using Prepaid Cell Phones to Interview Households Without an Available Phone Number; 2009; Brooks, K., Jaszczak, A., Wooten, K.
- Conducting Virtual Survey Research: RTI’s Facility in the Online Community Second Life®; 2009; Dean, E., Hill, C.
- Dispositions and Outcome Rates in the “Face-to- Face/Internet Survey Platform" (the FFISP); 2009; Sakshaug, J. W., Tourangeau, K., Krosnick, J. A., Ackermann, A., Malka, A., Debell, M., Turakhia, C.
- Attrition in a Face-to-Face Recruited Internet Panel with Substantial Incentives; 2009; Malka, A., Krosnick, J. A., Ackermann, A., Debell, M., Turakhia, C.
- Lessons Learned About How to Accomplish Effective In- Person Recruitment of a Web-Equipped Survey Panel...; 2009; Ackermann, A., Krosnick, J. A., Turakhia, C., Debell, M., Malka, A., Jarmon, R.
- Comparing an Internet Panel Survey to Mail and Phone Surveys on “Willingness to Pay” for...; 2009; Grandjean, B. D., Taylor, P. A., Nelson, N. M.
- Comparison Study of Probability and Non-Probability Sample Surveys Conducted by Internet and Face to...; 2009; Yeager, D. S., Krosnick, J. A.
- Do They Mean What They Say? Efficacy Evaluation of Assigning Sample Members Without a Mode Preference...; 2009; Brown, S. M., Grigorian, K. H.
- Cost and Quality in Low-Cost Survey Alternatives: A Comparison of Mail Versus Web; 2009; Dutwin, D., Donelan, K.
- Online Opinions: A Pilot Study to Extend the UK's Social Data Collection Capabilities; 2009; Dunn, E.
- Text-Message Surveys: Results in a Flash; 2009; Uriell, Z. A., Clewis, E.
- Understanding the Political Distinctiveness of the Cell Phone Only Public; 2009; Ansolabehere, S., Schaffner, B. F.
- Inclusion of Mobile-Only Households in Canadian Television Ratings Panels; 2009; Arzumanian, N., Gray, D.
- Examining Cell-Only, Cell-Mainly and Landline-Mainly Populations in California; 2009; Lee, S.
- A Social Profile of the “Wireless-Only” and “Wireless- Mostly” Population; 2009; Barron, M., Wolter, K.
- The Effects of Web and Mail Mixed-Mode Approaches on Response Rates in a Survey of Physicians; 2009; McFarlane, E., Murphy, J., Olmsted, M. G., Severance, J.
- Mode Choice in a Longitudinal Mail/Web/Telephone Survey; 2009; Kovac, M., Rogers, B., Mooney, G., Trunzo, D.