Web Survey Bibliography
Less than half a decade ago, online research had to proof in general that its data quality could keep up with traditional methods. Now that this initial debate has cooled and Web 2.0 is emerging, naturally the question arises how online research can profit from new web phenomena and surpass the features of traditional computer assisted interviews.
Web 2.0 can be considered as an evolution of the internet towards more interactivity and user generated content. Simultaneously, programming techniques such as Ajax (Asynchronous JavaScript and XML) are spreading. These can turn conventional “click-then-wait” content into a more desktop-like, low-latency, interactive one. If online researchers want to take advantage of this and create online surveys with interactive web 2.0 technologies, three key concerns are raised:
1. Can the average online user be surveyed with the new technology? Or do technical obstacles exist which either prevent her or him from filling out the questionnaire altogether or cause errors which distort the measurement?
2. How does the solution with the new technology compare to the older one? Does it yield to more or less information and do the results correlate well enough to ensure sufficient test reliability?
3. How do online users feel about the new survey technologies? Especially in market research, large numbers of users are routinely interviewed and surveys which are participant friendly are desirable to prevent from high rates of drop out within the survey and to ensure high participation rates in the long run.
To answer these questions, we carry out a case-study in which 300 online panel members are asked to rate various print and web stimulus material. 150 participants fill out a “traditional” HTML-based questionnaire (“web 1.0-group”). The other 150 participants fill out a HTML-based questionnaire which in addition features web 2.0 technologies to present and evaluate the stimuli (“web 2.0-group”). For example, the task of rating a print advertisement is helped with a magnifying glass. The task of rating web material is helped with an interactive “diary” tool ( NLR web scan ), which allows users to comment on websites while surfing on them.
To answer all three questions, we measure the failure rate due to technical problems. Furthermore, we calculate the inter-correlation between both methods as a measurement of inter-test-reliability and rate the amount and quality of collected data. Finally we assess the reaction of panellists towards the new technology: Does the new technology offer “joy of use” and support for “traditional” online research to keep up with the changing web landscape?
Based on all results, the acceptance and applicability of the web 2.0 technologies mentioned is evaluated and a recommendation for commercial as well as scientific use is provided.
General online research (GOR) 2008 (abstract)
Web survey bibliography - Conference proceedings (83)
- Estimation and Adjustment of Self-Selection Bias in Volunteer Panel Web Surveys ; 2016; Niu, Ch.
- Shorter Interviews, Longer Surveys: Optimising the survey participant experience whilst accommodating...; 2016; Halder, A.; Bansal, H. S.; Knowles, R.; Eldridge, J.; Murray, Mi.
- Gamifying. Not all fun and games; 2016; Stubington, P.; Crichton, C.
- Are interviews costing £0.08 a waste of money? Reviewing Google Surveys for Wisdom of the Crowd...; 2016; Roughton, G.; MacKay, I.
- Observations from Twelve Years of an Annual Market Research Technology Survey; 2016; Macer, T.; Wilson, S.
- A Comparison of the Effects of Face-to-Face and Online Deliberation on Young Students’ Attitudes...; 2015; Triantafillidou, A.; Yannas, P.; Lappas, G.; Kleftodimos, A.
- A Privacy-Friendly Method to Reward Participants of Online-Surveys; 2015; Herfert, M.; Lange, B.; Selzer, A.; Waldmann, U.
- Designing Bonsai Surveys: The small but perfectly formed survey experience to meet the needs of the...; 2015; Puleston, J.
- Is accuracy only for probability samples? Comparing probability and non-probability samples in a country...; 2013; Martinsson, J., Dahlberg, S., Lundmark, S.
- The effect of language in answering qualitative questions in user experience evaluation web-surveys; 2013; Walsh, T., Nurkka, P., Petrie, H., Olson, J.
- Beyond Satisfaction Questionnaires: “Hacking” the Online Survey; 2013; Evans, A. L.
- Advancing the field of questionnaire translation - identifying problems, discussing methods, pushing...; 2013; Behr, D., Dorer, B., Van Houten, G
- European Values Study - methodological and substantive applications; 2013; Luijkx, R., Jagodzinski, W.
- The Impact of Culture and Economy on Values and Attitudes; 2013; Duelmer, H., Voicu, M.
- Educational attainment in cross-national surveys: instrument design, data collection, harmonisation...; 2013; Schneider, S.
- Mode Effects in Mixed-Mode Surveys: Prevention, Diagnostics, and Adjustment 1; 2013; de Leeuw, E. D., Dillman, D. A., Schouten, B.
- The smart(phone) way to collect survey data; 2013; Stapleton, C.
- Unintentional mobile respondents; 2012; Peterson, G.
- Metering mobile usage. Insights from global Arbitron mobile trends panel; 2012; Verkasalo, H.
- Is „chapterisation“ a viable alternative to traditional progress indicators ?; 2012; Spicer, R., Dowling, Z.
- Self-administered mobile surveys; 2011; Bosnjak, M.
- Online survey research: Findings, Best practices, and future research; 2011
- Blend, balance, and stabilize respondent sources; 2011; Eggers, M., Drake, E.
- Mode Effect or Question Wording? Measurement Error in Mixed Mode Surveys; 2011; de Leeuw, E. D., Hox, J., Scherpenzeel, A.
- There is an app for that! A review of smartphone apps for marketing research; 2010; Michelson, M.
- The state of online research in the U.S.; 2010; Miller, J.
- A framework for understanding and applying ethical principles in network and security research; 2010; Kenneally, E., Bailey, M., Maughan, D.
- Restructuring and innovations on the survey “capacity of collective tourist accommodation”...; 2010; Santoro, M. T., Staffieri, S.
- An Analyze of the Zero Price Effect on Online Business Performance - An Research Based on the Mobile...; 2010; Liu, Y., Yuan, P.
- Dealing with Nonresponse in Survey Sampling: an Item Response Modeling Approach; 2010; Matei, A.
- Response format effects on measurement of employment; 2009; Thomas, R. K., Dillman, D. A., Smyth, J. D.
- Response Mode and Bias Analysis in the IRS’ Individual Taxpayer Burden Survey; 2009; Brick, J. M., Contos, G., Masken, K., Nord, R.
- Survey Mode Effects in Two Military Surveys; 2009; Yang, M., Falcone, A. E., Milan, L. M.
- Web based macroseismic survey: fast information exchange and elaboration of seismic intensity effects...; 2009; De Rubeis, V., Sbarra P., Sorrentino, D., Tosi, P.
- The representativeness of the LISS panel ; 2009; Knoef, M., de Vos, K.
- Sample factors that influence data quality; 2008; Gailey, R., Teal, D., Haechrel, E.
- An online panel as a platform for multi-disciplinary research; 2008; Scherpenzeel, A.
- Visual Design Effects on on Respondents Behaviour in Web-Surveys. A Design Experiment; 2008; Greinoecker, A.
- Effects of Privacy Assurances on the Online Measurement of Psychological Constructs; 2008; Witzki, A., Kramer, J.
- How Web 2.0 Technologies Can Become a Valuable Part of Online Research; 2008; Jaron, R.
- Respondent Authenticity - A biometrical approach to authenticate panelists; 2008; Wachter, B., Bender, C.
- Not Mixed-Mode but Switch-Mode; 2008; Höglinger, M., Abraham, M., Arpagaus, J.
- The Impact of Cognitive and Computer Skills on Data Quality in Computer Assisted Self Administered Questionnaires...; 2008; Brecko, B. N., Vehovar, V.
- Optimal Contact Strategy in a Mail-and-Web Mixed Mode Survey; 2008; Holmberg, A., Lorenc, B., Werner, P.
- 10 Years of Meinungsplatz.de: Success in the Collection of Data for Targeted Audiences, Such as the...; 2008; Weyergraf, O.
- Self-selection in Online Access Panels: No “Little Difference” in the Recruiting Process...; 2008; Wirth, T.
- Mobile Market Research; 2008; Maxl, E.
- Online vs. Offline in Mobile Surveys; 2008; Neubarth, W., Maier, U.
- Gender-of-Interviewer Effects in Video-Enhanced Web Surveys. Results from a Randomized Field-Experiment...; 2008; Fuchs, M.
- The Online Use of Randomized Response Measurements; 2008; Snijders, C., Weesie, J.