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 - Standards, codes (430)
- The Challenge and Importance of Including Spanish-Dominant Latinos in an Online Panel; 2009; Dennis, J. M., Wells, T., Torres, J.
- Web Panel Studies of the 2008 Election; 2009; Dennis, J. M., Tompson, T.
- Comparison Study of Early Adopter Attitudes and Online Behavior in Probability and Non-Probability Web...; 2009; Dennis, J. M., Osborn, L., Semans, K.
- Summary of KnowledgePanel® Design; 2009; Dennis, J. M.
- Presentation of a Single Item versus a Grid: Effects on the Vitality and Mental Health Scales of the...; 2009; Callegaro, M., Shand-Lubbers, J., Dennis, J. M.
- Computing Response Rates for Probability-Based Web Panels; 2009; DiSogra, C., Callegaro, M.
- Computer-Assisted Audio Recording (CARI): Repurposing a Tool for Evaluating Comparative Instrument Design...; 2009; Edwards, B., Hicks, W., Tourangeau, K., Harris-Kojetin, L., Moss, A.
- Do online translated questionnaires result in higher response rates for patient surveys?; 2009; Boyd, J., Davis, A.
- A comparison of two mixed mode designs: cati-capi and web-cati-capi; 2009; Beukenhorst, D., Wetzels, W.
- Comparison between Liss panel (web) and ESS data (face to face); 2009; Revilla, M., Saris, W. E.
- Is a cell phone really a personal device? Results from the first wave of a mobile phone panel on sharing...; 2009; Fuchs, M., Busse, B.
- Ethical Considerations in the Use of Paradata in Web Surveys; 2009; Couper, M. P., Singer, E.
- Online Analysis and Programmed Disclosure Risk Protection: New Access to Restricted-use Microdata; 2009; McFarland O’Rourke, J., Rush, S. H., Maxwell, C.
- Using the Available On-line Secondary Data in Education and Research Practice; 2009; Perek-Bialas, J.
- Nice portal! But where is the data . . . ? - Experiences of a data archive with offering online access...; 2009; Mauer, R.
- Making Use of Online Survey Documentation & Analysis; 2009; Terwey, M.
- Access to Survey Data on the Internet; 2009; Kolsrud, K.
- Motivating different groups: questionnaire topic and participation rates; 2009; Marchand, M.
- How to cover the general public by Internet interviewing; 2009; Das, M.
- The Internet sample; 2009; Getka-Wilczynska, E.
- Sampling Frame Coverage and Domain Adjustment Procedures for Internet Surveys; 2009; Asan, Z., Ayhan, H. O.
- New Challenges in Sampling: Introduction; 2009; Laaksonen, S.
- Presenting Answers in Random Order: A generic approach for presenting enumeration answers in random...; 2009; Lina, M.
- A Systematic Approach to Debugging in the Blaise Environment: An Author's Perspective; 2009; Sparks, P.
- Paradata and Blaise: A Review of Recent Applications and Research; 2009; O’Reilly, J.
- BlaiseIS at Statistics Netherlands; 2009; de Bolster, G.
- Development of Survey and Case Management facilities for organisations with minimal survey infrastructure...; 2009; Wensing, F.
- Case Management System Based on Wireless Telecommunications; 2009; Kuusela, V., Räikkönen, T., Vikki, K.
- Quality assurance through Computer Audio- Recorded Interviewing (CARI): The Statistics New Zealand Case...; 2009; Seymour, C.
- Be mindful of cellphone interviews; 2009; Anonymous
- If You Provide It, Will They Read It? Response Time Effects in a Choice Experiment; 2009; Vista, A. B., Rosenberger, R. S., Collins, A. R.
- File transfer with built-in editing features; 2009; Erikson, J.
- From paper to internet: Design challenges when mixing modes in longitudinal surveys; 2009; Stax, H.-P., Thomsen, P.
- The Use of Audit Trails in Business Web Surveys; 2009; Snijkers, G., Morren, M.
- Comparing the results of Web surveys on volunteer versus probabilistically selected panels of participants...; 2009; Galesic, M.
- Using Mail Contact to Sample and Encourage Submission of Questionnaire Answers Over the Internet; 2009; Dillman, D. A., Messer, B. L., Millar, M. M.
- Interactive aspects of web surveys; 2009; Conrad, F. G.
- Use of Web surveys in Official Statistics; 2009; Bethlehem, J.
- Donations to charity as incentives in online panels; 2009; Goeritz, A.; Hox, J.
- The Electronic Questionnaire Experience in Business Surveys: mode effects on quality and on response...; 2009; Biffignandi, S., Siesto, G., Zeli, A.
- Reducing Measurement Errors in Surveys; 2009; de Leeuw, E. D.
- Pros and Cons of Internet Surveys Compared to Traditional Survey Methods; 2009; Benjamin, G. D.
- Ethical Issues in Internet Research ; 2009; McKee, H., Porter, J.
- Zero Banks: Coverage Error in List Assisted RDD Samples; 2009; Boyle, J., Bucuvalas, M., Piekarski, L., Weiss, A.
- Combining Data from Probability and Non-Probability Samples Using Pseudo-Weights; 2009; Elliott, M. R.
- The Collected Works of Robert M. Groves, 6 Book Set (Wiley Series in Survey Methodology); 2009; Groves, R. M.
- Complex Surveys: A Guide to Analysis Using R (Wiley Series in Survey Methodology); 2009; Lumley, T. S.
- Methodology of Longitudinal Surveys (Wiley Series in Survey Methodology); 2009; Lynn, P.
- Applied Survey Methods: A Statistical Perspective (Wiley Series in Survey Methodology); 2009; Bethlehem, J.
- Empirical Evaluation of Web Survey Software Tools: Powerful or Friendly?; 2009; Vehovar, V., Berzelak, N., Lozar Manfreda, K., Horvat, T., Debevc, M.