Web Survey Bibliography
Survey researchers who regularly conduct online surveys may wish to monitor and ensure the quality of surveys. From a respondent’s perspective the quality of a survey manifests itself as attitudes towards the survey. The attitudes can be assessed with questions concerning the satisfaction, the cognitive burden and other survey related issues. However, these scales do not explain why a specific survey was rated as very good or poor compared to other surveys. Furthermore, the available instruments for attitudes towards surveys are unsuited for regular implementation because of their length. We propose a single-item open-ended question which can both be easily implemented in each survey and which provides more insight into respondents’ perception of a survey than rating scales. To allow computer-assisted content analysis of the answers we developed a dictionary. The dictionary is based on 6 online surveys including different topics and samples (6694 completed questionnaires, 4150 answers to the item). The validity coefficient for the automatic coding regarding the two central aspects of positive and negative evaluations is .951. A comparison between participants and their answer tendencies showed the following results: Women have a higher tendency towards positive evaluations than men. Whereas, higher educated and older respondents show a tendency to more negative answers. The content of the answers fits into the theoretical concept of respondent burden (Bradburn 1978). The dictionary-based approach allows calculation of a satisfaction index for each survey similarly to the use of rating scales. Additionally, the proposed open-ended question captures a greater variety of evaluation dimensions than rating scales. Respondents can evaluate the issues they themselves find most relevant concerning the quality of a given survey. On the one hand survey researchers are able to assess whether a survey receives a poor evaluation because it is “boring” or “too personal”. On the other hand a good evaluation can be caused by “interesting” questions or because it is “important”. The proposed one-item instrument allows survey researchers to track the quality of their surveys with minimal burden for the respondents while gathering differentiated feedback regarding the questionnaire.
Conference homepage (abstract)
Web survey bibliography - 2009 (509)
- Creation and Usability Testing of a Web-Based Pre-Scanning Radiology Patient Safety and History Questionnaire...; 2016; Robinson, T. J.; DuVall, S.; Wiggins III, R
- Mixed Research as a Tool for Developing Quantitative Instruments; 2009; Onwuegbuzie, A. J.; Bustamante, R. M.; A. A.Nelson, J. A.
- Slider Scales in Online Surveys; 2009; Cape, P. J.
- User’s Guide to the Advance Release of the 2008-2009 ANES Panel Study ; 2009; DeBell, M.; Krosnick, J. A.; Lupia, A.; Roberts, C.
- The denominator problem: Estimating MSM-specific incidence of sexually transmitted infections and prevalence...; 2009; Marcus, U., Schmidt, A. J., Kollan, C., Hamouda, O.
- Survey Research in the United States: Roots and Emergence 1890-1960 ; 2009; Converse, P. D.
- Practical Considerations in Raking Survey Data; 2009; Battaglia, M. P., Hoaglin, D.C, Franklin, P. D.
- Methods for oversampling rare subpopulations in social surveys; 2009; Kalton, G.
- Start of the LISS panel: Sample and recruitment of a probability-based Internet panel ; 2009; Scherpenzeel, A.
- Comparing response rates in e-mail and paper surveys: A meta-analysis; 2009; Shih, T.-H., Fan, X.
- Recycling and waste minimisation behaviours of the transient student population in Oxford: results of...; 2009; Robertson, S., Walkington, H.
- ESS Handbook for Quality Reports; 2009
- ESS Standard for Quality Reports; 2009
- Guest Blog: More on the Problems with Opt-in Internet Surveys; 2009; Langer, G.
- Psychological Factors Affecting Perceptions of Unsolicited Commercial E-mail; 2009; Morimoto, M., Chang, S.
- Innovations in Social Science Research Methods; 2009; Xenitidou, M., Gilbert, N.
- Where Is the unproctored Internet testing train headed now?; 2009; Tippins, N. T.
- Statistical disclosure control for survey data; 2009; Skinner, C.
- Response format effects on measurement of employment; 2009; Thomas, R. K., Dillman, D. A., Smyth, J. D.
- Preserving the integrity of online testing; 2009; Burke, E.
- Mobile surveys from a technological perspective; 2009; Pferdekämper, T., Batanic, B.
- MarketTools TrueSample; 2009
- ISO 26362 Access panels in market, opinion, and social research-Vocabulary and service requirements; 2009
- Internet alternatives to traditional proctored testing: Where are we now?; 2009; Tippins, N. T.
- From the Editor; 2009; Sackett, P. R.
- Exploring mode effects in a panel survey of new businesses; 2009; Santos, B., DesRoches, D.
- Dirty little secrets of online panels. And how the one you select can make or break your study; 2009
- comScore Media Metrix U.S. Methodlogy. An ARF research review; 2009; Cook, W. A., Pettit, R.
- Can we make official statistics with self-selection web surveys?; 2009; Bethlehem, J.
- Attitudes over time: The psychology of panel conditioning; 2009; Sturgis, P., Allum, N., Brunton-Smith, I.
- Association collaborative effort releases online research definitions, expands membership; 2009
- The Effect of Phrasing Scale Items in Low-Brow or High-Brow Language on Responses; 2009; Blasius, J., Friedrichs, J.
- Question and Questionnaire Design; 2009; Krosnick, J. A., Presser, S.
- Attrition in Consumer Panels; 2009; Tortora, R. D.
- Sample Design for Understanding Society ; 2009; Lynn, P.
- The 2008 Confirmit Annual Market Research Software Survey; 2009; Macer, T., Wilson, S.
- Predicting Tie Strength With Social Media; 2009; Karahalios, K., Gilbert, Er.
- A Special Report from the Advertising Research Foundation - The Foundations of Quality Initiative: A...; 2009; Walker, R., Pettit, R., Rubinson, J.
- A Web-Based Tool for Assessing and Improving the Usefulness of Community Health Assessments; 2009; Stoto, M. A., Straus, S. G., Bohn, C., Irani, P.
- The rise of survey sampling; 2009; Bethlehem, J.
- Using an ABS frame to recruit a probability-based online panel; 2009; DiSogra, C.
- Address Based Sampling: How to Do It, Practical Tips; 2009; Dutwin, D.
- Use of Incentives in Survey Research; 2009; Lavrakas, P. J.
- Stochastic properties of the Internet sample; 2009; Getka-Wilczynska, E.
- Continuous Measurement of Musically-Induced Emotion: A Web Experiment ; 2009; Egermann, H., Nagel, F., Altenmueller, E., Kopiez, R.
- E-epidemiology : Adapting epidemiological methods for the 21st century; 2009; Bexelius, C.
- Web based survey: an emerging tool; 2009; Srivenkataramana, T., Saisree, M.
- The Use of Online Methodologies in Data Collection for Gambling and Gaming Addictions; 2009; Griffiths, M. D.
- Questasy: Online Survey Data Dissemination Using DDI 3; 2009; de Bruijne, M., Amin, A.
- Methodeneffekte von Web-Befragungen: Soziale Erwünschtheit vs. Soziale Entkontextualisierung; 2009; Taddicken, M.