Web Survey Bibliography
Reason analysis is a long sidelined method of data collection and analysis. I would like to draw attention to the applicability of the method today for addressing current complex social research problems. In my paper I will recount the roots and principles of the method and how it is applied. In conclusion I will present some examples of it in use and some of the problems connected with its practical application in research.
Reason analysis is an analysis of the individual reasons and motives behind the process of decision
‐making relating to various questions. It can be applied in social research generally, in public opinion research, and in market research. The method and principles of reason analysis were first expounded by Paul Felix Lazarsfeld in his article The Art of Asking “Why?” published in 1935. Over the next thirty years it was employed several times as part of the “Princeton Radio Project” and in research conducted by the Columbia Sociology School. Charles Kadushin wrote the entry on “reason analysis” in the International Encyclopedia of Social Sciences. The method then fell into obscurity for the next forty years.
The principles and approach to reason analysis: The method derives from an attempt to address the variance between a question posed generally and the individual ways in which people answer “why” questions. In the first step we ask respondents a simple question about what reason led them to make the decision they did. This decision may be a serious life decision, such as deciding to marry their chosen partner, moving into a new home, visiting a psychiatrist, or, conversely, smaller individual decisions, such as buying a new car, or a particular cosmetic product. The fact is that people usually give just one reason for their decision. Data obtained this way cannot be processed by simply categorising respondents according to what type of response they gave to this one introductory question. Every respondent naturally has all sorts of reasons for their decision. What is important is that we can hear various types of responses to the introductory question from the same mouth. The reason for buying a new Citroen C3 in light blue may be a personal preference for this brand and the person’s old car has just broken down and the cost of repairs is rising. An important motive may be that the opportunity arises to write an old car off for scrap while there is also a sale on a particular new model. The person’s partner may have heard something complimentary said about a particular model of car. The brand, model, and its accessories may be recommended by the showroom salesperson while a TV commercial aired last Sunday also encouraged a person to buy. A combination of any or all these reasons is the only correct and full answer to the original question. The “reason analysis” method looks for and proposes a concrete “tree” of questions, an “accounting scheme”. The next step is preparation of the structured interview in which variant questions are posed about the “quality of a product”, both the product replaced and the newly bought one, how the product was evaluated in advertising, by the seller, by friends and acquaintances, and the “circumstances of the situation”. In the end, it is necessary to group the responses into classes and types according to which responses are most alike and where significant differences are between them. The method did not catch on mainly owing the demands it puts on researchers. In most survey type research it was replaced by the factorial approach, which examines the effect of individual causes (influential factors) jointly for an entire sample of individuals or other units.
The question for today is whether this method has a place in current social research. The paper presents examples of research situations which directly require individualised models of data collection and whose objective is to reveal and analyse further typologies of actors making certain decisions in a given situation and under the influence of individual factors.
Conference homepage (abstract)
Web survey bibliography - Other (439)
- A comparison of surveys using different modes of data collection; 2010; Revilla, M., Saris, W. E.
- Examining the effects of website-induced flow in professional sporting team websites; 2010; O'Cass, A., Carlson, J.
- Research into questionnaire design - A summary of the literature; 2010; Lietz, P.
- College Students' Response Rate to an Incentivized Combination of Postal and Web-Based Health Survey; 2010; Balajti I., Daragó, L., Ádány, R., Kósa, K.
- Improving the response rate and quality in Web-based surveys through the personalization and frequency...; 2010; Muñoz-Leiva, F., Sánchez-Fernández, J., Montoro-Ríos, F. J., Ibáñez-Zapata, J. A.
- What are participants doing while filling in an online questionnaire: A paradata collection tool and...; 2010; Stieger, S., Reips, U.-D.
- ESS Handbook for Quality Reports; 2009
- ESS Standard for Quality Reports; 2009
- MarketTools TrueSample; 2009
- ISO 26362 Access panels in market, opinion, and social research-Vocabulary and service requirements; 2009
- Stochastic properties of the Internet sample; 2009; Getka-Wilczynska, E.
- Web based survey: an emerging tool; 2009; Srivenkataramana, T., Saisree, M.
- The impact of gender in e-mailed survey invitations; 2009; Derham, P.
- The Coverage Bias of Mobile Web Surveys Across European Countries ; 2009; Fuchs, M., Busse, B.
- Interactivity in self-administered surveys. Influence on respondents' experience; 2009; Suarez Vazquez, A., Garcia Rodriguez, N., Alvarez, M. B.
- Metrics for panel contribution: a non probabilistic platform; 2009; Gittelmam, S. H., Trimarchi, E.
- Mode effects in Switzerland: non‐response and measurement error on the European Social Survey; 2009; Roberts, C.
- Reason analysis: an ambitious alternative for mixed‐mode survey design; 2009; Jerabek, H.
- Response rates in multi actor surveys; 2009; Pasteels, I., Ponnet, K., Mortelmans, D.
- Unit non‐response in panel surveys: empirical finding from an experiment; 2009; Haunberger, S.
- 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.
- Comparison between Liss panel (web) and ESS data (face to face); 2009; Revilla, M., Saris, W. E.
- The influence of the field time on data quality in list-based Web surveys; 2009; Goeritz, A., Stieger, S.
- Why don’t all Businesses report on Web?; 2009; Haraldsen, G.
- Turning Grid Questions into Sequences in Business Web Surveys; 2009; Haraldsen, G., Bergstrøm, Y.
- Visual Design Effects on Respondents’ Behavior in Web-Surveys; 2009; Greinoecker, A.
- Applying theory to structure respondents' stated motivations for participating in web surveys; 2009; Han, V., Albaum, G., Wiley, J. B., Thirkell, P.
- Web-based survey attracted age-biased sample with more severe illness than paper-based survey; 2009; Klovning, A., Sandvik, H., Hunskaar, S.
- Online Election Surveys: Keeping the Voters Honest? ; 2009; Gibson, R., McAllister, I.
- A recipe for effective participation rates for web-based surveys ; 2009; Bennett, L., Nair, C. 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.
- 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.
- Three Different Designs of Type Ranking‐Questions; 2009; Sackl, 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.
- Self-Efficacy Of Online Health Seekers; 2009; Stetina, B. U., Schramel, C., Lehenbauer, M., Schawill, W., Kryspin-Exner, I.
- 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.
- Implementation of a reaction time tool for brand measurement at Swisscom; 2009; Paar, I., Urbahn, J.
- Measuring Network Quality: Strengths and Weaknesses of different Evaluation Methods (SMS, w@p and web...; 2009; Wallisch, A., Schwab, H.
- Large Scale Digital Data Collection in Developing Countries: Is The Time Right? ; 2009; Hattas, M., Cronje, M., Berard, O.
- Implementation of web-based data-collection channel eSTAT for economic entities; 2009; Sillajoe, T.
- Personality on Social Network Sites: An Application of the Five Factor Model; 2009; Wehrli, S.
- Use of Online Interviews in the Underlying Discourse Unveiling Method (UDUM); 2009; Nicolaci-da-Costa, A. M., Romao-Dias, D., Di Luccio, F.