Web Survey Bibliography
The advantages of an online access panel are obvious: obtaining data is quick and economical. The changing desires, needs and opinions of those taking part in the surveys are tracked along a timeline, which is so much more valuable than a simple depiction of the consumer’s opinion at the specific point in time when the survey was taken. The customer therefore has a much more transparent and calculable impression of the everchanging market parameters.
In order to utilize these advantages in market research (also in a market-specific way), we have developed a process that enables us to maintain the most up-to-date information in our online database. By surveying a single target audience, one has the opportunity to more closely observe market segments and to access niche markets more quickly – if all the information is accurate. Any changes in the demographic data, interests, hobbies and preferences that go unnoticed pose a risk for the validity of the overall result.
Even though we find it problematic, we understand that, when panel participants change their data or interests, that they forget to account for this in the statistics or possibly feel some inhibition in the face of the panel registration. This is why we have been working in a much different way for 10 years now: In order to keep our panelists from becoming bored and to keep them interested in becoming participants in the surveys, we allow them to get started after a brief registration and only a few questions: but, we ask these few questions more often – specifically 2 questions after every survey. In this way, we obtain all the data we require – current, fresh and new.
As an example, we keep the registration for one of our most interesting target audiences, the “silver surfers”, as simple as possible. And our customers profit from the up-to-date inventory of data and the opinions solicited from this attractive target audience of people aged 50+ years.
The silver surfers are of particular interest to us because of this group’s rapid growth. Birth rates are dropping, and, according to the Federal Office of tatistics, this means that Germany will have twice as many 60-year olds as newborns by the year 2050. Life expectancy rates are climbing – and until now, the purchasing power of this group has not been tapped. And there is another, very important factor for the purpose of online research: in Germany there are about 7 million people over the age of 50 who have an internet connection and use it regularly.
We make sure that this target audience and all our other panel participants can access us quickly and easily. We also have an extraordinarily up-to-date data inventory. This is the subject we would like to address in the call for papers.
Die Vorteile eines Online Access Panels liegen auf der Hand. Die Datenbeschaffung ist schnell und wirtschaftlich. Die sich ändernden Wünsche, Bedürfnisse und Meinungen der Befragten werden auf einer Zeitschiene abgebildet und zeigen nicht nur die Meinung der Konsumenten im Augenblick der Befragung. Der immer schneller werdende Veränderungsprozess der Marktparameter wird damit für den Kunden rechtzeitig transparent und einschätzbar gemacht.
Um diese Vorteile der Onlineforschung auch marktspezifisch nutzen zu können, haben wir ein Verfahren entwickelt, unsere Onlinedatenbanken hochaktuell zu halten. Gerade die Befragung einer einzelnen Zielgruppe birgt die Chance, Marktsegmente noch genauer beobachten und Nischenmärkte noch schneller erschließen zu können – wenn die Daten aktuell sind. Unvermerkte Änderungen in den demografischen Daten, Interessen, Hobbys, Präferenzen stellen eine Gefahr für das Gesamtergebnis dar. Auch wenn wir es nicht gut finden: Wir haben Verständnis dafür, wenn Panelteilnehmer, deren Daten oder Interessen sich geändert haben, dies im Nachhinein nicht in der Statistik vermerken oder vor der Panel-Zugangs-Hemmschwelle der Registrierung zurück schrecken.
Deshalb arbeiten wir seit 10 Jahren anders: Um unsere Panelisten nicht zu ermüden und sie zu ermutigen, Teilnehmer zu werden, lassen wir sie nach der Anmeldung bereits nach wenigen Fragen starten. Aber dafür gibt es die wenigen Fragen um so öfter. Nach jeder Befragung zwei. Und so bekommen auch wir alle Daten, die wir brauchen. Aktuell, frisch und unverbraucht.
Damit wird auch die Anmeldung für unsere interessante Zielgruppe, den „Silversurfer“, einfach gemacht. Und unsere Kunden profitieren von dem hoch aktuellen Datenbestand und der Meinung dieser attraktiven Zielgruppe im Alter von 50 +. Die Silversurfer sind für uns zum einen so interessant, weil sie eine wachsende Zielgruppe sind. Die Geburtenrate ist rückgängig und so erklärt das statistische Bundesamt, dass Deutschland im Jahr 2050 doppelt so viele 60 Jährige wie Neugeborene haben wird. Die Lebenserwartung steigt – und bis jetzt ist die Kaufkraft dieser Zielgruppe ungebrochen. Hinzu kommt der für Onlineforschung existenzielle Faktor: In Deutschland gibt es knapp sieben Millionen Menschen, die über 50 Jahre alt sind, einen Internetanschluss haben und diesen nutzen. Dieser Zielgruppe, wie auch allen anderen Panelteilnehmern haben wir den Zugang zu uns besonders einfach gemacht. Und wir haben zudem einen außerordentlich aktuellen Datenbestand. Das ist es, worüber wir im „Call for Papers“ sprechen möchten.
General online research (GOR) 2008 (abstract)
Web survey bibliography (431)
- Interviewer effects on onliner and offliner participation in the German Internet Panel; 2017; Herzing, J. M. E.; Blom, A. G.; Meuleman, B.
- Millennials and emojis in Spain and Mexico.; 2017; Bosch Jover, O.; Revilla, M.
- Comparing the same Questionnaire between five Online Panels: A Study of the Effect of Recruitment Strategy...; 2017; Schnell, R.; Panreck, L.
- Do distractions during web survey completion affect data quality? Findings from a laboratory experiment...; 2017; Wenz, A.
- A Comparison of Two Nonprobability Samples with Probability Samples; 2017; Zack, E. S.; Kennedy, J. M.
- Targeted letters: Effects on sample composition and item non-response; 2017; Bianchi, A.; Biffignandi, S.
- Oversampling as a methodological strategy for the study of self-reported health among lesbian, gay and...; 2017; Anderssen, N.; Malterud, K.
- Analyzing Survey Characteristics, Participation, and Evaluation Across 186 Surveys in an Online Opt-...; 2017; Revilla, M.
- Comparison of response patterns in different survey designs: a longitudinal panel with mixed-mode and...; 2017; Ruebsamen, N.; Akmatov, M. K.; Castell, S.; Karch, A.; Mikolajczyk, R. T.
- Determinants of polling accuracy: the effect of opt-in Internet surveys; 2017; Sohlberg, J.; Gilljam, M.; Martinsson, J.
- Article Establishing an Open Probability-Based Mixed-Mode Panel of the General Population in Germany...; 2017; Bosnjak, M.; Dannwolf, T.; Enderle, T.; Schaurer, I.; Struminskaya, B.; Tanner, A.; Weyandt, K.
- Effects of Mobile versus PC Web on Survey Response Quality: a Crossover Experiment in a Probability...; 2017; Antoun, C.; Couper, M. P.; G. G.Conrad, F. G.
- Impact of satisficing behavior in online surveys on consumer preference and welfare estimates; 2016; Gao, Z.; House, L. A.; Bi, X.
- Comparing Twitter and Online Panels for Survey Recruitment of E-Cigarette Users and Smokers; 2016; Guillory, J.; Kim, A.; Murphy, J.; Bradfield, B.; Nonnemaker, J.; Hsieh, Y. P.
- Targeted Appeals for Participation in Letters to Panel Survey Members; 2016; Lynn, P.
- Motivated Misreporting in Web Panels; 2016; Bach, R.; Eckman, S.
- Using official surveys to reduce bias of estimates from nonrandom samples collected by web surveys; 2016; Beresovsky, V.; Dorfman, A.; Rumcheva, P.
- A Feasibility Study of Recruiting and Maintaining a Web Panel of People with Disabilities; 2016; Chandler, J.
- Inferences from Internet Panel Studies and Comparisons with Probability Samples; 2016; Lachan, R.; Boyle, J.; Harding, R.
- Exploring the Gig Economy Using a Web-Based Survey: Measuring the Online 'and' Offline Side...; 2016; Robles, B. J.; McGee, M.
- Comparing data quality between online panel and intercept samples; 2016; Liu, M.
- Integration of a phone-based household travel survey and a web-based student travel survey; 2016; Verreault, H.; Morency, C.
- Are Final Comments in Web Survey Panels Associated with Next-Wave Attrition?; 2016; McLauchlan, C.; Schonlau, M.
- Estimation and Adjustment of Self-Selection Bias in Volunteer Panel Web Surveys ; 2016; Niu, Ch.
- Participation in an Intensive Longitudinal Study with Weekly Web Surveys Over 2.5 Years; 2016; Barber, J. S.; Kusunoki, Y.; Gatny, H. H.; Schulz, P.
- The impact of survey duration on completion rates among Millennial respondents ; 2016; Coates, D.; Bliss, M.; Vivar, X.
- Cognitive Probing Methods in Usability Testing – Pros and Cons; 2016; Nichols, E. M.
- Assessing the Accuracy of 51 Nonprobability Online Panels and River Samples: A Study of the Advertising...; 2016; Yang,Y.;Callegaro,M.;Yang,Y.;Callegaro,M.;Chin,K.;Yang,Y.;Villar,A.;Callegaro, M.; Chin, K.; Krosnick...
- Calculating Standard Errors for Nonprobability Samples when Matching to Probability Samples ; 2016; Lee, Ad.; ZuWallack, R. S.
- User Experience and Eye-tracking: Results to Optimize Completion of a Web Survey and Website Design ; 2016; Walton, L.; Ricci, K.; Libman Barry, A.; Eiginger, C.; Christian, L. M.
- Using Web Panels to Quantify the Qualitative: The National Center for Health Statistics Research and...; 2016; Scanlon, P. J.
- Does Changing Monetary Incentive Schemes in Panel Studies Affect Cooperation? A Quasi-experiment on...; 2016; Schaurer, I.; Bosnjak, M.
- Web Probing for Question Evaluation: The Effects of Probe Placement ; 2016; Fowler, S.; Willis, G. B.; Moser, R. P.; Townsend, R. L. M.; Maitland, A.; Sun, H.; Berrigan, D.
- Using Cash Incentives to Help Recruitment in a Probability Based Web Panel: The Effects on Sign Up Rates...; 2016; Krieger, U.
- Making Connections on the Internet: Online Survey Panel Communications ; 2016; Libman Barry, A.; Eiginger, C.; Walton, L.; Ricci, K.
- Evaluating a Modular Design Approach to Collecting Survey Data Using Text Messages ; 2016; West, B. T.; Ghimire, D.; Axinn, W.
- Safety First: Ensuring the Anonymity and Privacy of Iranian Panellists’ While Creating Iran...; 2016; Farmanesh, A.; Mohseni, E.
- Tracking the Representativeness of an Online Panel Over Time ; 2016; Klausch, L. T.; Scherpenzeel, A.
- Non-Observation Bias in an Address-Register-Based CATI/CAPI Mixed Mode Survey; 2016; Lipps, O.
- Bees to Honey or Flies to Manure? How the Usual Subject Recruitment Exacerbates the Shortcomings of...; 2016; Snell, S. A., Hillygus, D. S.
- Thinking Inside the Box Visual Design of the Response Box Affects Creative Divergent Thinking in an...; 2016; Mohr, A. H.; Sell, A.; Lindsay, T.
- Establishing the accuracy of online panels for survey research; 2016; Bruggen, E.; van den Brakel, J.; Krosnick, J. A.
- Adaptive survey designs to minimize survey mode effects – a case study on the Dutch Labor Force...; 2016; Calinescu, M.; Schouten, B.
- What is the gain in a probability-based online panel to provide Internet access to sampling units that...; 2016; Revilla, M.; Cornilleau, A.; Cousteaux, A-S.; Legleye, S; de Pedraza, P.
- Representative web-survey!; 2016; Linde, P.
- The Utility of an Online Convenience Panel for Reaching Rare and Dispersed Populations; 2016; Sell, R.; Goldberg, S.; Conron, K.
- Evaluating Online Labor Markets for Experimental Research: Amazon.com's Mechanical Turk; 2016; Berinsky, A.; Huber, G. A.; Lenz, G. S.
- Setting Up an Online Panel Representative of the General Population The German Internet Panel; 2016; Blom, A. G.; Gathmann, C.; Krieger, U.
- Reducing Underreports of Behaviors in Retrospective Surveys: The Effects of Three Different Strategies...; 2016; Lugtig, P. J.; Glasner, T.; Boeve, A.
- Dropouts in Longitudinal Surveys; 2016; Lugtig, P. J.; De Leeuw, E. D.