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 - Online measurement (791)
- Improving the quality of complex surveys: The case of the EU Labour Force Survey ; 2012; van der Valk, J.
- The re-engineering of the Structural Earnings survey process: Mixed - Mode data collection and new E...; 2012; Cardinaleschi, S., De Santis, S., Rocci, F., Spinelli, V.
- Between demand and reality: Ensuring efficiency and quality in pretesting questionnaires; 2012; Sattelberger, S., Blanke, K.
- How to provide high data quality in online-questionnaires: Setting guidelines in design; 2012; Tries, S., Nebel, S., Blanke, K.
- Boosting Web pick-up Rates by referring to Compliance Principles ; 2012; Falnes-Dalheim, E., Haraldsen, G., Sundvoll, A.
- Ebook readings jumps, print book reading declines; 2012; Rainie, L., Duggan, M.
- Developments and the impact of smart technology; 2012; Macer, T.
- How Should Debriefing Be Undertaken in Web-Based Studies? Findings From a Randomized Controlled Trial...; 2012; McCambridge, J., Kypri, K., Wilson, A.
- Better customer in sight in real time; 2012; Macdonald, E., Wilson, H. N., Konus, H.
- An experimental investigation of the effects of noncontingent and contingent incentives in recruiting...; 2012; Lavrakas, P. J., Dennis, J. M., Peugh, J., Shand-Lubbers, J., Lee, E., Peugh, J., Charlebois, O., Murakami...
- The Feasibility of Conducting a Web Survey Using Respondent Driven Sampling among Transgenders in the...; 2012; Kappelhof, J.
- The role of topic interest and topic salience in online panel web surveys.; 2012; Keusch, F.
- Multi-Language Multi-Continent B2B Community Panel: How B2B research can effectively span the world; 2012; Morden, M., Accomando, E.
- Can Survey Gaming Techniques Cross Continents? Examining cross cultural reactions to creative questioning...; 2012; Puleston, J.
- Rules of engagement: The war against poorly engaged respondents - guidelines for elimination; 2012; Gittelman, S. H., Trimarchi, E.
- WebSM Study: Survey software features overview ; 2012; Vehovar, V.; Cehovin, G.; Kavcic, L.; Lenar, J.
- Web Panels; 2012; Bethlehem, J., Biffignandi, S.
- Use of Response Propensities; 2012; Bethlehem, J., Biffignandi, S.
- Weighting Adjustment Techniques; 2012; Bethlehem, J., Biffignandi, S.
- The Problem of Self-Selection; 2012; Bethlehem, J.,Biffignandi, S.
- Designing a Web Survey Questionnaire; 2012; Bethlehem, J., Biffignandi, S.
- Examining Contexts-of-Use for Web-Based and Paper-Based Questionnaires; 2012; Hardré, P. L., Crowson, H. M., Xie, K.
- Probabilistic survey questions and incorrect answers: Retirement income replacement rates; 2012; van Santen, P., Alessie, R., Kalwij, A.
- Survey Quality; 2012; Lyberg, L. E.
- Effects of E-Mailed Versus Mailed Invitations and Incentives on Response Rates, Data Quality, and Costs...; 2012; Dykema, J., Stevenson, J., Klein, L., Kim, Y., Day, B.
- Unit Non-Response Due to Refusal; 2012; Stoop, I.
- Non-Response and Measurement Error; 2012; Billiet, J., Matsuo, H.
- An Overlooked Approach in Survey Research: Total Survey Error; 2012; Bautista, R.
- Data Quality in HIV/AIDS Web-Based Surveys: Handling Invalid and Suspicious Data; 2012; Bauermeister, J. A., Pingel, E., Zimmerman, M., Couper, M. P., Carballo-Diéguez, A., Strecher, V. J.
- Response rates in three opinion surveys performed through online questionnaires in the health setting...; 2012; Aerny Perreten, N., Domínguez-Berjón, M. F., Astray Mochales, J., Esteban-Vasallo, M. D., Blanco Ancos...
- Impact of Fixed Choice Design on Blockmodeling Outcomes; 2012; Znidarsic, A.
- The Mode of Invitation for Web Surveys; 2012; Bandilla, W., Couper, M. P., Kaczmirek, L.
- Disfluencies and Gaze Aversion in Unreliable Responses to Survey Questions; 2012; Schober, M. F., Conrad, F. G., Dijkstra, W., Ongena, Y. P.
- Evaluating Survey Questions: A Comparison of Methods; 2012; Yan, T., Kreuter, F., Tourangeau, R.
- When More Gets You Less: A Meta-Analysis of the Effect of Concurrent Web Options on Mail Survey Response...; 2012; Medway, R., Fulton, J.
- Reliable Online Social Network Data Collection; 2012; Abdesslem, F. B., Parris, I., Henderson, T.
- Enhancing Web Surveys With New HTML5 Input Types; 2012; Funke, F.
- Panel retention rate and data quality: experimental results drawing on Reciprocity design; 2012; Biffignandi, S., Artaz, R.
- Presidential Elections in Iceland 2012 – Did online panel surveys give false hope to new candidates...; 2012; Jonsdottir, G. A., Dofradottir, A. G., Bjornsdottir, A. E.
- Website exit surveys. What can we measure with them?; 2012; Andreadis, I.
- Challenges and pitfalls of measuring wages via web surveys - some explorations; 2012; Steinmetz, S., Bianchi, A., Tijdens, K., Biffignandi, S.
- Firefly Online Surveys: A fully featured tool for Web surveys and forums; 2012; Deal, K.
- Doing the E-Delphi: Using Online Survey Tools; 2012; Holloway, K.
- Using the Web to Snowball Discussants of Survey Respondents; 2012; Hopmann, D. N.
- Online Questionnaire Data Analysis System (OQDAS); 2012; Ali, A. Q.
- A Structural Analysis Based on Similarity between Fuzzy Clusters and Its Application to Evaluation Data...; 2012; Chiba, R., Furutani, T., Sato-Ilic, M.
- Online Survey Spawning, Administration And Management ; 2012; Jepson, S., Powlette, J. F., Queenan, M.
- Mixed Mode Survey Design: Mode Effect Problem; 2012; Sztabinski, F., Zmijewska-Jedrzejczyk, T.
- Transferring Telephone-Based National Household Travel Survey to the Internet ; 2012; Son, S., Khattak, A., Wang, X., Chen, J.-Y.
- Myths and realities of respondent engagement in online surveys; 2012; Downes-Le Guin, T., Baker, R. P., Mechling, J., Ruyle, E.