Web Survey Bibliography
To date, researchers have assumed that continuums ranging from left to right (or top to bottom) and positive to negative (or negative to positive) are the optimal questionnaire format. This format is thought to encourage reading of all scale points and to promote comprehension of the words used for each response option. If verbal labels are constructed by researchers as arrayed in a continuum, then what respondents might actually be doing is ranking a construct according to its slot on a continuum relative to other constructs measured using the same type of scale.
This study compares the results yielded by two types of rating scales. One scale was designed to mimic the conventional scales widely used in survey research with response options fully labeled verbally. The second set of scales was presented one of four ways; 1) a slider with five verbal labels on it, exactly mimicking a traditional Likert scale, but with tick marks along the scale, 2) a slider with five tick marks on it, but only the end points labelled with the text anchors, 3) a slider with no tick marks and with only the end points labelled with the text anchors, 4) a slider with anchors but no tick marks but with the actual “numerical score” displayed as the slider is moved. Respondents in the United States, the United Kingdom, Germany, and China were members of an online panel and were randomly assigned to receive either the conventional, verbal, presentation or one of the four visual presentations.
Respondents report a preference for the slider approach because it allows for more accurate opinion reporting. The results suggest that using a slider rather than a traditional Likert scale will produce the same mean scores. It would therefore seem likely that the slider scales would also increase levels of engagement, which in turn could improve data quality by reducing satisficing. On the other hand, sliders take longer to complete, which may decrease quality (although completion time may decrease somewhat as respondents become used to using the slider). Additional analyses will illuminate which type of scale yields greater predictive validity.
Conference homepage (abstract)
Web survey bibliography - General Online Research Conference (GOR) 2009 (54)
- Conducting Mobile Surveys: A Hands-on Introduction to an Innovative Research Mode; 2009; Pferdekämper, T., Melcher, T.
- Empirical Evaluation of Web Survey Software Tools: Powerful or Friendly?; 2009; Vehovar, V., Berzelak, N., Lozar Manfreda, K., Horvat, T., Debevc, M.
- Qualitative Research via Internet: Asynchronous Online Discussions and the Use of WebCT; 2009; Giatsi Clausen, M., Nicol, M., Gill, J.
- Representativeness of Mobile Internet Surveys - A comparative study of CAMI vs. CATI ; 2009; Maier, U., Neubarth, W., Grosser, A., Hombach, A.
- The use of online data-collection in financial services market measurement research : the FRS experience...; 2009; Cooke, M., Watkins, N.
- Using flash type questions – stroke of luck or curse for data quality?; 2009; Laufer, S., Klapproth, U., Noll, S.
- Pause Mechanism in Complex Online Surveys; 2009; Milewski, J.
- Response Formats in Cross-cultural Comparisons in Web-based Surveys; 2009; Thomas, R. K.l, Terhanian, G., Funke, F.
- Generic or Project-Specific Mail? – The Influence of Invitations on Response Behaviour in the...; 2009; Schroll, S.
- Relevance Of Health-Related Online-Information In Offline- And Online-Samples; 2009; Stetina, B. U., McElheney, J., Lehenbauer, M., Hinterberger, E., Pintzinger, N., Kryspin-Exner, I.
- Data Collection online: Can do, must (not) do, Should do; 2009; Diesner, J., Gadeib, A., Lüttschwager, F., Sassinot-Uny, L.
- Three Different Designs of Type Ranking‐Questions; 2009; Sackl, A.
- Usability of Mobile Surveys; 2009; Tarkus, A.
- Gay and Lesbian People: The Use of Online Communication Services; 2009; Lehenbauer, M., Stetina, B. U., Kryspin-Exner, I.
- An Online Study on Coping with Anxiety and Disease-Specific Internet Use in Panic Attack Sufferers; 2009; König, D., Hiebler, C., Kryspin-Exner, I.
- Distortion of demographics through technically induced dropout in restricted online surveys; 2009; Voracek, M., Stieger, S., Goeritz, A.
- An Internet-based Study on Coping with Illness and Attitudes towards Online Health Care in Cancer Patients...; 2009; Setz, J., König, D., Kryspin-Exner, I.
- WebEXEC: A Short Self-Report Measure of Executive Function Suitable for Administration via the Internet...; 2009; Buchanan, T., Heffernan, T. M., Parrott, A. C., Ling, J., Rodgers, J., Scholey, A. B.
- Let's go formative: Continuous student ratings with Web 2.0 application Twitter; 2009; Burger, C., Stieger, S.
- Don't know and no opinion responses in Web surveys; 2009; Mechling, J., Baker, R. P., Couper, M. P.
- Mixed Methods in Online Research; Conceptualisation and Future Research Agenda; 2009; Koller, M., Sinitsa, E.
- Market Research Online and Offline - Differences in output and processing of Qualitative Online and...; 2009; Knorr, H., Krischke-Ramaswamy, M.
- Informal Learning in Virtual Communities. Individual Practice between Information Retrieval, Observation...; 2009; Kahnwald, N.
- Self-Efficacy Of Online Health Seekers; 2009; Stetina, B. U., Schramel, C., Lehenbauer, M., Schawill, W., Kryspin-Exner, I.
- Volumetric Forecast based on Online Access Panels; 2009; Rodenhausen, T., Drewes, F.
- How representative are sentiments expressed in social media for the marketing target audience? A comparison...; 2009; Jarchow, C., Thomas, J.
- SNB - Social Network Barometer; 2009; Drosdow, M., Geißler, H.
- Payments via Paypal as an Incentive in Online Panels; 2009; Goeritz, A., Wolff, H.-G., Goldstein, D. G.
- Advertising Effects of Online Video Ads; 2009; Wolf, M., Schönfeldt, J.
- Online election forecasts; 2009; Faas, T., Geißler, H.
- Propensity Score Adjustment for Web Survey of Voting Behavior: A Case in Japan; 2009; Kobayashi, T.
- Why Do I Use the Social Web?” Exploring the Motives of Active and Passive Users via Focus Groups...; 2009; Jers, C., Taddicken, M., Schenk, M.
- Diffusion of Mobile Services Adoption in Taiwan; 2009; Doong, H.-S., Wang, H.-C.
- Verbal Vs Visual Response Options: Reconciling Meanings Conveyed by a Computer Aided Visual Rating Scale...; 2009; Garland, P., Cape, P.
- Increasing response rates in list based samples; 2009; Keusch, F., Kurz, H., Penzkofer, P.
- Resolving the Privacy Paradox? - How Privacy Concerns, Strategic Self-presentation, and Norms Influence...; 2009; Utz, S.
- AGOF internet facts – increasing the response rate for onsite-surveys; 2009; Foerstel, H.
- Implementation of a reaction time tool for brand measurement at Swisscom; 2009; Paar, I., Urbahn, J.
- It’s all about customer satisfaction - Advantages and limitations of online surveys in applied...; 2009; Einhorn, M., Klein-Reesink, T., Löffler, M.
- Potential Of The Mobile Internet - What You Ask Is What You Get; 2009; Neubarth, W., Maier, U., Geißlitz, A.
- Measuring Network Quality: Strengths and Weaknesses of different Evaluation Methods (SMS, w@p and web...; 2009; Wallisch, A., Schwab, H.
- Challenges in Recruiting Special Groups in Internet Panel Research; 2009; Marchand, M., Vis, C.
- Panel Conditioning in Web Surveys: A Comparison between Trained and Fresh Respondents; 2009; Toepoel, V., Das, M., van Soest, A.
- Using Tag Clouds to Analyse and Visualise Results of Open Ended Questions; 2009; Melles, T., Jaron, R.
- Measuring Perceived Virtual Social Support in Online Self-Help Groups; 2009; Preiß, H.
- Personalization as Strategy to Increase Response Rates; 2009; Althoff, S.
- Understanding the willingness to participate in mobile surveys: Exploring the role of hedonic, affective...; 2009; Bosnjak, M., Metzger, G.
- Integrating Mobile Surveys into digital market research: Recommendations for Mobile Panel operation...; 2009; Friedrich-Freksa, M., de Groote, Z., Metzger, G.
- Measurement options, measurement error, and usability in mobile surveys; 2009; Pferdekämper, T., Bosnjak, M., Metzger, G.
- Visual Heuristics and Answer Formats in Rating Scales; 2009; Toepoel, V. Dillman, D. A.