Web Survey Bibliography
It is generally accepted that conducting surveys online is both faster and cheaper than other, more traditional, survey methodologies. Such advantages have helped to drive the growth of online surveys over recent years. In addition to the growth of online surveys, respondents are increasingly required to answer more personal and sensitive questions online. It is therefore important to investigate and understand the behaviour of respondents to sensitive questions in surveys in order to ensure the most effective methodology is employed.
A salient issue in online survey research is the removal of an interviewer. This is particularly relevant when dealing with sensitive topics - when the lack of interviewer presence can remove response bias. Much research has demonstrated that surveys administered online, without an interviewer being present, are characterised by higher levels of self disclosure (Weisband and Kiesler 1996), an increased willingness to answer sensitive questions (Tourangeau 2004) and reductions in socially desirable responding (Frick et al. 2001; Joinson 1999). Furthermore, survey methodologies that reduce the level of question administration by human interviewers (e.g. via computer-aided self interviews) also increase responses to sensitive personal questions and yield more honest, candid answers.
As part of the ongoing experimental work at Ipsos MORI we are investigating the affect of different survey methodologies on respondents’ behaviour to sensitive questions.
In the present paper we present a two part study. Part 1 searches evidence of survey mode effect on disclosure levels and examines data consisting of participants interviewed in one of three conditions. In condition one, 1,645 members of the Ipsos Online Panel completed an online survey. In condition two, 902 were interviewed offline, face-to-face using Computer Assisted Personal Interviewing (CAPI) interviewing. Finally, in condition three, 1028 participants were again interviewed offline, using Computer Assisted Self Interviewing (CASI). Direct comparison were possible between the two offline samples. Allocation to the online sample, on the other hand, was not randomized thus propensity score adjustment was applied to control for possible confounding of online/offline comparisons. Respondents were asked more than 50 questions about a variety of topics from politics to media consumption. Within these questions respondents were asked five which were deemed as sensitive. The topics for the sensitive items covered: immigration, adultery, drink driving, abortion, and attitudes toward debt.
Part 2 examined the association between the level of sensitivity and level of disclosure, and specifically any differences between the three survey modes. To estimate the social sensitivity an ad hoc panel of five experienced independent social researchers sampled from a larger pool of experts and were asked to rank levels of sensitivity of each of the five questions. After passing reliability tests of agreement between raters the estimated sensitivity was correlated with item disclosure level by mode.
Finally, implications for the handling of sensitive questions in survey research are discussed.
Web Survey Bibliography - Standards, codes (445)
- Forum - Research 2.0: engage or give up the ghost?; 2009; Oxley, M., Light, B.
- Summaries of Address-Based Sampling Presentations at the AAPOR Annual Meeting; 2009; W., Daily, G., Shuttles, D. C., Yancey, L. T., Thu Burks, A., Bourquin, C.Link, M. W.
- Effects of Questionnaire Length on Participation and Indicators of Response Quality in a Web Survey; 2009; Galesic, M., Bosnjak, M.
- Questionnaire Survey Nonresponse: A Comparison of Postal Mail and Internet Surveys ; 2009; Hoonakker, P., Carayon, P.
- Open-Ended Questions in Web Surveys: Can Increasing the Size of Answer Boxes and Providing Extra Verbal...; 2009; Smyth, J. D., Dillman, D. A., Christian, L. M., McBride, M.
- Using Internet survey paradata to optimize survey questionnaire design; 2009; Heerwegh, D.
- Nonresponse in the Recruitment of an Internet Panel Based on Probability Sampling; 2009; Hoogendoorn, A., Daalmans, J.
- Internet research differs from research on internet users: some methodological insights into online...; 2009; Lohmann, M., Schmucker, D. J.
- Improving survey response in mail and internet general public surveys using address-based sampling and...; 2009; Messer, B. L.
- Are Mode Preferences Real?; 2009; Millar, M. M., O'Neill, A. C., Dillman, D. A.
- The Internet as a research site: establishment of a web-based longitudinal study of the nursing and...; 2009; Huntington, A., Gilmour, J., Schluter, P., Tuckett, A., Bogossian, F., Turner, C.
- Mobile Phone Interviewing - Why being engaged is a good thing!; 2009; Johnson, A. J., Martin, P.
- Mobility, Flexibility and Identity - How the use of mobile questionnaires improves the data quality...; 2009; Hellwig, O., Wirth, T.
- Anytime, Anywhere Mobile Interviewing: Comparing Mobile Voice and Web Response Patterns; 2009; Petit, F. C.
- Using mobile phones to measure TV-broadcast quality; 2009; Wieland, J. L., Puggaard, B.
- Life360: Use of Mobile Technology for Electronic Ethnographic Studies; 2009; W., Lai, J. W., Vanno, L., Makowska, H., Benezra, K., Green, M.Link, M. W.
- Ethical suicide research: A survey of researchers ; 2009; Lakeman, R., Fitzgerald, M.
- Mobile phone surveys in mixed mode environment; 2009; Vehovar, V.
- Survey Methodology (Wiley Series in Survey Methodology); 2009; Groves, R. M., Fowler, F. J., Couper, M. P., Lepkowski, J. M., Singer, E., Tourangeau, R.
- Introducing Visual Methods ; 2008; Prosser, J., Loxley, A.
- Providing Real-Time Incentives for Anonymous Web Surveys; 2008; Heinrich, T.
- Technology and the Survey Interview and Questionnaire; 2008; Couper, M. P.
- Quality Criteria for Quantitative, Qualitative and Mixed Methods Research: A View from Social Policy...; 2008; Bryman, A., Becker, S., Sempik, J.
- Encyclopedia of Survey Research Methods; 2008; Lavrakas, P. J.
- Internet, Mail, and Mixed-Mode Surveys: The Tailored Design Method ; 2008; Dillman, D. A., Christian, L. M., Smyth, J. D.
- The Methodological Issues Associated With Internet-Based Research; 2008; Beddows, E.
- Experiments in Mobile Web Survey Design; 2008; Peytchev, A., Hill, C.
- A multimedia-based and time-sensitive interactive web survey for road user opinion on traffic condition...; 2008; Posawang, P., Phosaard, S., Polnigongit, W., Pattara-Atikom, W.
- CAQDAS, Secondary Analysis and the Coding of Survey Data; 2008; Fielding, N.
- Machines that Learn how to Code Open-Ended Survey Data: Underlying Principles, Experimental Data, and...; 2008; Sebastiani, F.
- Computer coding of 1992 ANES Like/Dislike and MIP responses; 2008; Fan, D. P.
- CATA (Computer Aided Text Analysis) Options for the Coding of Open-Ended Survey Data; 2008; Skalski, P.
- Classifying Open Occupation Descriptions in the Current Population Survey; 2008; Conrad, F. G., Couper, M. P.
- Coding Responses Generated by Open-Ended Questions: Meaning Matching or Meaning Inference?; 2008; Potter, J.
- Open-ended questions and text analysis; 2008; Popping, R.
- Coding Verbal Data - What to Optimize?; 2008; Krippendorff, K.
- Practical advice for conducting ethical online experiments and questionnaires for United States psychologists...; 2008; Barchard K. A., Williams, J.
- Research Instruments: Driving e-Science? ; 2008; Schroeder, R.
- The US Institutional Review Board and Online Research Ethics; 2008; Markham, A., Buchanan, E. A., Ess, C.
- What Can We Achieve With 5 Euros? Optimization of Survey Data Quality Using Mixed-Mode Approaches; 2008; Berzelak, N., Vehovar, V., Lozar Manfreda, K.
- Measuring Non-Response Cross Nationally; 2008; Blom, A. G.
- Testing the Effects of Multiple Manipulations on Print and Online Survey Response Rates: Lessons Learned...; 2008; Bachman, M., Vaccaro, D.
- Validating Check-All and Forced-Choice Question in a Paper Survey of Provincial Park Campground Users...; 2008; Dyck, B., Moore, D.
- Rate of Response in Web-Based Data Collection as a Factor of Author of E-mail Invitation; 2008; Mitra, A.
- Graduate vs. Undergraduate Student Respondent Behavior Differences in Web Surveys; 2008; Showen, S., Eisenberg, D., Roe, D. J.
- Mode Effects and Non-Response Bias in an Undergraduate Student Satisfaction Survey: Results from a Randomized...; 2008; Beach, S., Musa, D., Beeson, P., Sparks, C.
- Worth the Weight?: The Benefits and Pitfalls in Applying Survey Weights to Web Surveys of College Undergraduates...; 2008; Bloom, J. D.
- Improving the Efficiency of Web Survey Experiments; 2008; Luks, S., Rivers, D.
- Computing Metrics for Online Panels; 2008; Callegaro, M., DiSogra, C.
- 2006 Canadian Census Internet Mode Effect Study; 2008; Grondin, C., Sun, L.,