Web Survey Bibliography
Theoretical background. Since approximately ten years, telephone surveys in Germany belong to the most frequently used survey modes in the social sciences, which is especially due to its low costs compared with e.g. face
‐to‐face surveys and its high flexibility concerning organization and conduct (ADM 2008). However, these advantages are increasingly opposed by declining response rates in academic as well as commercial surveys. Over time, response rates have steadily diminished, whereas different sources partly supply highly diverse figures: some report on response rates below 40 percent, some on rates around 70 percent (cf. Berinsky 2008, 309f; De Leeuw & De Heer 2002; Schnell, Hill & Esser 1999, 286ff.). The key explanations are non‐contact and refusals (Berinsky 2008, 310; Lavrakas 2008, 252). Our own surveys reveal that non‐contact as well as refusal rates rose within the last five years about 5‐10 percentage points, whereby the rates differ from survey to survey. While in September 2003 29 percent of all households could not be reached, in May 2008 that was the case regarding 44 percent of the households. And while in September 2003 31 percent of the interviewees refused, 43 percent did so in February 2008. Literature suggests numerous explanations for both phenomena. Non‐contact occurs e.g. because of increased mobility or the absence of a landline telephone in households (cf. Pew 2008). In Germany, around 5‐7 percent of the population do not have landline telephones but only cell phones (cf. Hunsicker & Schroth 2007). If this trend continues, telephone surveys on the basis of landlines cannot be regarded as being representative anymore. Refusals occur e.g. because of over‐surveying, insufficient trust in survey institutes or lack of time (vgl. Schnauber & Daschmann 2008). Against this background, the question arises whether telephone surveys are still feasible in the long run. First, it is possible that the non‐response is systematic and biases the survey results, which hence (as mentioned above) cannot be interpreted as being representative anymore (Schnauber & Daschmann 2008, 98). Second, the resolution of the problems or the change to another survey mode (e.g. inclusion of cell phones) would trigger high additional costs. Nevertheless, there are some approaches to meet these obstacles. By modifying e.g. the call time or the number of call attempts, the number of contacts could be improved. By altering the introductory phrases and by enhancing the professionalism of the interviewers, e.g. by extensive training, one could try to reduce refusal rates (cf. Meier, Schneid, Stegemann & Stiegler 2005). ‐term telephone surveys conducted at our department yield a huge data basis to answer the questions deduced above. On the one hand, we aim to analyze the difficulty of decreasing response rates and hence the decreasing quality of the surveys. On the other hand, we pursue the question as to whether the theoretically derived explanations for non‐contact and refusals can be confirmed by our empirical data. In summary, we try to answer the question as to whether telephone survey will still be feasible in the future or not.
Method and conduct. Long
Conference homepage (abstract)
Web survey bibliography - Germany (361)
- Are well-selected panelists better respondents? Insights into the effect of a master screener on panel...; 2010; Irmer, C., Tress, F.
- Selection Bias in Web Surveys and the Use of Propensity Scores in Forecasting the Result of the 2009...; 2010; Musch, J., Ullrich, S., Diedenhofen, D.
- Self-administered mobile surveys: Usability and (non)participation; 2010; Scherrer, S., Bosnjak, M.
- Social desirability and self-reported health risk behaviors in web-based research: three longitudinal...; 2010; Crutzen, R., Goeritz, A.
- Security and Data Protection: Collection, Storage, Feedback in Internet Research; 2010; Thiele, O., Kaczmirek, L.
- Methoden der Online-Forschung; 2010; Welker, M., Wünsch, C.
- Online-Befragungen im Kontext von Lehrevaluationen – praktisch und unzuverlässig; 2010; Meinefeld, W.
- The Effects of Different Incentives on Data Quantity and Data Quality in Online Panels; 2010; Singh, R. K., Voggeser, B. J., Goeritz, A.
- Breakoff in Web Surveys of the German Longitudinal Election Study (GLES); 2010; Blumenstiel, J. E., Roßmann, J., Steinbrecher, M.
- The longitudinal effect of incentives on participation and data quality in online panels; 2010; Neumann, B. P., Goeritz, A.
- The denominator problem: Estimating MSM-specific incidence of sexually transmitted infections and prevalence...; 2009; Marcus, U., Schmidt, A. J., Kollan, C., Hamouda, O.
- Mobile surveys from a technological perspective; 2009; Pferdekämper, T., Batanic, B.
- The Effect of Phrasing Scale Items in Low-Brow or High-Brow Language on Responses; 2009; Blasius, J., Friedrichs, J.
- Continuous Measurement of Musically-Induced Emotion: A Web Experiment ; 2009; Egermann, H., Nagel, F., Altenmueller, E., Kopiez, R.
- Methodeneffekte von Web-Befragungen: Soziale Erwünschtheit vs. Soziale Entkontextualisierung; 2009; Taddicken, M.
- A Comparison of Different Survey Periods in Online Surveys of Persons with Eating Disorders and Their...; 2009; Wesemann, D., Grunwald, A., Grunwald, M.
- Are telephone Surveys a dying bread. How declining response rates can be explained and resolved; 2009; Degen, M., Obermüller, A., Schielicke, A.-M.
- Are people sharing their mobile phones? Selection probabilities in cellular telephone surveys; 2009; Fuchs, M., Busse, B.
- Accuracy of Estimates in Access Panel based Surveys; 2009; Enderle, T., Münnich, R., Bruch, C.
- Survey cooperation: response to initial and follow-up requests - Recent experiences from the recruitment...; 2009; Bartsch, S., Engel, U., Schnabel, C., Vehre, H.
- Using Mobile Phones to Administer a Working Memory Updating Task in a Survey - Cognitive Performance...; 2009; Schmiedek, F., Riediger, M., Lindenberger, U., Wagner, G. G.
- Accessibility of individuals for mobile phone surveys; 2009; Gabler, S., Häder, S.
- Mobile Phone Surveys in Germany – Response rates and response behaviour; 2009; Hader, S., Schneiderat, G.
- Interviewer voice characteristics and productivity in telephone surveys; 2009; Best, H., Bauer, G., Steinkopf, L.
- 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.
- The influence of the field time on data quality in list-based Web surveys; 2009; Goeritz, A., Stieger, S.
- Are Respondents Sharing their Mobile Phones? Preliminary results based on a mobile phone panel in Germany...; 2009; Fuchs, M.
- Dynamic feedback in open-ended questions: Experiments on the visual design language of Web surveys; 2009; Fuchs, M.
- Effects of monetary incentives on participation in a two-wave online survey; 2009; Bandilla, W., Haas, I.
- Representativeness of Mobile Internet Surveys - A comparative study of CAMI vs. CATI ; 2009; Maier, U., Neubarth, W., Grosser, A., Hombach, A.
- Using flash type questions – stroke of luck or curse for data quality?; 2009; Laufer, S., Klapproth, U., Noll, S.
- Generic or Project-Specific Mail? – The Influence of Invitations on Response Behaviour in the...; 2009; Schroll, S.
- An Online Study on Coping with Anxiety and Disease-Specific Internet Use in Panic Attack Sufferers; 2009; König, D., Hiebler, C., Kryspin-Exner, I.
- Volumetric Forecast based on Online Access Panels; 2009; Rodenhausen, T., Drewes, F.
- How representative are sentiments expressed in social media for the marketing target audience? A comparison...; 2009; Jarchow, C., Thomas, J.
- SNB - Social Network Barometer; 2009; Drosdow, M., Geißler, H.
- Payments via Paypal as an Incentive in Online Panels; 2009; Goeritz, A., Wolff, H.-G., Goldstein, D. G.
- Advertising Effects of Online Video Ads; 2009; Wolf, M., Schönfeldt, J.
- Online election forecasts; 2009; Faas, T., Geißler, H.
- Why Do I Use the Social Web?” Exploring the Motives of Active and Passive Users via Focus Groups...; 2009; Jers, C., Taddicken, M., Schenk, M.
- Verbal Vs Visual Response Options: Reconciling Meanings Conveyed by a Computer Aided Visual Rating Scale...; 2009; Garland, P., Cape, P.
- AGOF internet facts – increasing the response rate for onsite-surveys; 2009; Foerstel, H.
- It’s all about customer satisfaction - Advantages and limitations of online surveys in applied...; 2009; Einhorn, M., Klein-Reesink, T., Löffler, M.
- Potential Of The Mobile Internet - What You Ask Is What You Get; 2009; Neubarth, W., Maier, U., Geißlitz, A.
- Using Tag Clouds to Analyse and Visualise Results of Open Ended Questions; 2009; Melles, T., Jaron, R.
- Measuring Perceived Virtual Social Support in Online Self-Help Groups; 2009; Preiß, H.
- Personalization as Strategy to Increase Response Rates; 2009; Althoff, S.
- Integrating Mobile Surveys into digital market research: Recommendations for Mobile Panel operation...; 2009; Friedrich-Freksa, M., de Groote, Z., Metzger, G.
- Social Web and Self-Disclosure = Participation vs. Privacy? Exploring How Users Manage this Dilemma...; 2009; Taddicken, M., Jers, C., Schenk, M.