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 (6359)
- 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.
- Interviewer Intercept vs. Inbound Web Satisfaction Surveys; 2009; Stapleton, C.
- Decline to Answer: SED Web Respondent Results of Explicit and Passive Item Refusal; 2009; Jimenez, L. M., Welch, V. E., Ahsan, S., Groenhout, B.
- Mail Invitation Letters for a Web Survey of a Targeted Population: Does the Cost Result in Response...; 2009; Jackson, N. M.
- What Difference Does It Make? Adding Cell Phone Numbers to Traditional Land-Line Samples; 2009; Lambries, D., Oldendick, R. W., Williams, L. G.
- Cost-Error Optimization Model for Mixed-Mode Surveys; 2009; Vehovar, V., Berzelak, N., Lozar Manfreda, K.
- Challenges and Benefits of Interactive Online Surveys: A Case Survey of Youth Political Ideology; 2009; Ren, G.
- An Exploratory Study of Participant Perceptions of In-Avatar Interviewing and Virtual Settings; 2009; Tuten, T. L., Dean, E.

