Web Survey Bibliography
Sensitive behavioral questions in surveys often result in self-reports which are distorted by social desirability bias. Interviewees underreport socially undesirable behavior and overreport socially desirable activities. Such systematic measurement error in turn generates erroneous prevalence estimates of the behavior in question. Standard literature on survey methodology often recommends (1) positive loading of sensitive questions, e.g. using forgiving wording, or (2) choosing a permissive question context to encourage interviewees to answer more honestly. However, only few attempts to systematically validate these recommendations can be found in the experimental literature. Based on theories of cognitive dissonance (Festinger 1957; Aronson 1999) and the inclusion-/exclusion-model (Schwarz & Bless 1992, 2007), we derive explanations how manipulations of question wording and context could elicit more socially undesirable answers in sensitive surveys. In an experimental online survey (N=1176, 4 splits), we evaluate the eects of (1) forgiving-wording and (2) question context (permissive versus restrictive) on social desirability bias in dierent sensitive behavioral questions. Consistent with former experimental ndings (Catania et al. 1996; Holtgraves et al. 1997; Presser 1990; Tourangeau & Smith 1996) the empirical evidence of the predicted eects is mixed. Thus, the assumed social desirability bias-reducing effect of forgiving wording and permissive question context respectively should not be taken for granted.
Conference homepage (abstract)
Web Survey Bibliography - European survey research associaton conference 2009, ESRA, Warsaw (36)
- An experimental mixed mode design on a general population survey ; 2009; Eva, G.
- 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.
- Survey Research in Virtual Worlds: Second Life R as a Research Platform; 2009; Hill, C., Dean, E.
- Elderly in an Internet panel, the quality of the data; 2009; Vis, C.
- 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.
- Mobile Phone Surveys in Germany – Response rates and response behaviour; 2009; Hader, S., Schneiderat, G.
- Ethical Considerations in the Use of Paradata in Web Surveys; 2009; Couper, M. P., Singer, E.
- Interviewer voice characteristics and productivity in telephone surveys; 2009; Best, H., Bauer, G., Steinkopf, L.
- Standardized recall aids for online life course surveys; 2009; Glasner, T.
- The impact of forgiving wording and question context on social desirability bias in sensitive surveys...; 2009; Naher, A.- F., Krumpal, I.
- Interactive feedback can improve accuracy of responses in web surveys; 2009; Conrad, F. G., Couper, M. P., Tourangeau, R., Galesic, M.
- Increasing Confidence in Survey Estimates with Visual Analogue Scales; 2009; Funke, F., Reips, U. -D., Thomas, R. K.
- Effectiveness of incentives in mixed-mode systems: An evaluation of errors & costs; 2009; Lozar Manfreda, K., Berzelak, N., Vehovar, V.
- The influence of the field time on data quality in list-based Web surveys; 2009; Goeritz, A., Stieger, S.
- Twisting Rating Scales: Horizontal versus Vertical Visual Analogue Scales versus Categorical Scales...; 2009; Funke, F., Reips, U. -D.
- 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.
- Individual Follow-up of the Target Population: the Plural Strategies of a Web Survey; 2009; Markou, E., de Cledat, B., Razafindratsima, N., Laurent, R., Issenhuth, P.
- The influence of selective nonresponse in the analysis of levels of annoyance and sleep disturbance...; 2009; Breugelmans, O.
- 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.
- Comparing different weighting procedures for volunteer online panels - Lessons to be learned from German...; 2009; Steinmetz, S., Tijdens, K., de Pedraza, P.
- Selection bias in Internet panels: challenge or dead blow?; 2009; Lensvelt-Mulders, G. J.
- Presentation of WEBSURVNET; 2009; de Pedraza, P., Steinmetz, S., Tijdens, K.
- Telephone Survey and political behaviour estimates in 22 European countries: Evaluating the need for...; 2009; Hufken, V.
- Self-Selected Samples in Customer Satisfaction Surveys; 2009; Nicolini, G., Dalla Valle, L.
- What to do if Probability Sampling is Impossible in a Web Survey?; 2009; Markou, E., Razafindratsima, N., de Cledat, B., Issenhuth, P., Laurent, R.
- New Challenges in Sampling: Introduction; 2009; Laaksonen, S.