Web Survey Bibliography
There are many different schemes for classifying the final disposition of cases in a survey. Our committee reviewed more than two dozen classifications and found no two exactly alike. They distinguished between 7 and 28 basic categories. Many codes were unique to a particular study and categories often were neither clearly defined nor comparable across surveys.
To avoid this babel of survey disposition codes, and to allow the comparable reporting of final dispositions and consistent calculation of outcome rates, AAPOR proposes a standardized classification system for final disposition of sample cases, and a series of formulas that use these codes to define and calculate the various rates.
A detailed report of the final disposition status of all sampled cases in a survey is vital for documenting a survey’s performance and determining various outcome rates. Such a record is as important as detailed business ledgers are to a bank or business. In recognition of this premise, the reports on the final disposition of cases are often referred to as accounting tables (Frankel, 1983; Madow, et. al., 1983). They are as essential to a well-documented survey as the former are to a well-organized business.
AAPOR - Homepage (abstract) / (full text)
Web Survey Bibliography - 2009 (628)
- 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.
- Sampling of populations: methods and applications, 4th Edition; 2009; Levy, P. S., Lemeshow, S.
- Response format effects on measurement of employment; 2009; Thomas, R. K., Dillman, D. A., Smyth, J. D.
- Recovering the scientist-practitioner model: How IOs should respond to unproctored internet testing; 2009; Beaty, J. C. et al.
- 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
- Introduction to meta-analysis; 2009; Borenstein, M. et al.
- Internet alternatives to traditional proctored testing: Where are we now?; 2009; Tippins, N. T.
- Global market research 2009; 2009
- Getting data for (business) statistics: What's new? What's next?; 2009; Snijkers, G.
- 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.
- Computing weights for the American National Election Study survey data; 2009; Debell, M., Krosnick, J. A.
- Cheating on proctored tests: The other side of the unproctored debate; 2009; Drasgow, F., Nye, C. D., Guo, J., Tay, L.
- 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; Gilbert, E., Karahalios, K.
- A Special Report from the Advertising Research Foundation - The Foundations of Quality Initiative: A...; 2009; Walker, R., Pettit, R., Rubinson, J.
- Social Network Services as Data Sources and Platforms for e-Researching Social Networks; 2009; Ackland, R.
- 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.
- Piloting Data Collection via Cell Phones: Results, Experiences, and Lessons Learned; 2009; ZuWallack, R. S.
- E-epidemiology : Adapting epidemiological methods for the 21st century; 2009; Bexelius, C.
- Survey results as incentives in online panels. Unpublished manuscript; 2009; Goeritz, A.
- Computing response metrics for online panels; 2009; Callegaro, M., DiSogra, 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.
- Designing and Implementing a Career Retrospective Web-based Survey of Library and Information Science...; 2009; Morgan, J. C., Marshall, J. G., Marshall, V., Thompson, C.
- Metadata-Driven Survey Design; 2009; Iverson, J.
- 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.