Web Survey Bibliography
Online panels are becoming the standard choice for researchers today. The temptation to use them is overwhelming as they are a less expensive alternative to traditional telephone and face-to-face research and the results are available sooner. Are they the right choice for all research projects? There is no question that considerable effort is being devoted to building better panels. Commonly, however, the “virtues” of panels are demonstrated not by their intrinsic measurement superiority but by their speed and low cost vis à vis other sampling and data collection modes and/or by deficiencies in other types of surveys (e.g., falling response rates in telephone studies because of consumer avoidance techniques and new technologies masking geography etc as well as the growth in cell-only households). Conversely, online panel research limitations are often overlooked (convenience samples, coverage bias etc.) in favour of cost and timing attributes. As broadband Internet access increases, coverage error and potential bias for online surveys will likely decrease but not eliminated. Market research practitioners and users have long recognized that focus groups or shopping mall intercepts are not suitable tools for answering some types of questions. The same applies to online panels. They have their place in the toolbox but purveyors and users are engaged in an ongoing discussion about which types of questions they are best able to answer. Can they replace studies based on a random sample of respondents within a defined universe in which the probability of selection is known? There remains considerable support for the position that when quantitative estimates such as market shares are required, they should be derived from studies that rely on random probability sampling rather than online panels (Chakrapani,2007) Nonetheless, like other services, newspapers are under increasing pressure to be “with it” (a.k.a. be on the web), to reduce data collection costs (a.k.a. be on the web), and to increase reporting ease and speed (a.k.a. be on the web). Since 1986 newspapers in Canada have relied on traditional telephone data capture techniques to estimate readership of daily papers in major markets, to build profiles of readers and to set market parameters and pricing for advertising. Millions of dollars of advertising revenue depend on readership and profile estimates of how many and who reads specific daily newspapers. How are print media and advertising mavens going to determine when or if to move to online panels? As Canada’s newspaper audience measurement agency, the Newspaper Audience Databank Inc. (NADbank) has been monitoring developments in online panel research for some time. In 2006 the organization embarked on a journey to determine if its annual study could be moved from a modified RDD telephone methodology to a web-based survey. The results of this parallel online survey using the TNS Canadian Facts’ web-access panel in Toronto were reported to this symposium in 2007. The results from the first study showed that the demographic profiles of respondents in the online panel differed from the population as a whole and the telephone sample. As well as demographic differences, there were variations in general media behaviour as well as the primary metric being investigated: readership of daily newspapers. As only one online panel was included in the test, there was no way to assess the extent to which profile differences were a function of idiosyncrasies of the single panel and/or were linked to online panel data capture per se. In the fall of 2007 a second, larger scale study was undertaken to further explore the differences between telephone and online protocols; inter-supplier consistency and the potential use of a web-based survey outside of the Toronto market.
Conference Homepage (abstract) / (full text)
Web survey bibliography - 2009 (509)
- Response Mode and Bias Analysis in the IRS’ Individual Taxpayer Burden Survey; 2009; Brick, J. M., Contos, G., Masken, K., Nord, R.
- Survey Mode Effects in Two Military Surveys; 2009; Yang, M., Falcone, A. E., Milan, L. M.
- Measuring Internet And Press Audience In The Media Convergence Era. In Search Of A New Paradigm In Researching...; 2009; Pawlak, J., Póltorak, M.
- The Decline And Fall Of The Response Rate: The Fightback ; 2009; Green, A., Staplehurst, S., Windle, R.
- Internet Measurement of Ad-noting: Sampling and Statistical Issues; 2009; Frankel, M. R., Baim, J., Galin, M., Agresti, J., Augemberg, K.
- Audipresse Premium: Using The Internet To Help Measure Press Readership ; 2009; Saint-Joanis, G., Néraudau, J.
- Questionnaire Intelligence: New Rules Of Engagement For Online Survey Design ; 2009; McMahon, L., Stamp, R.
- Presenting Publications in Online Print Audience Questionnaires; 2009; Carroll, J., Collins, S., Farrer, N.
- Methodological Tests On Online Research: Incidence Of Formal Aspects/Questionnaire Layout On The Results...; 2009; Schmutz, B., Lê Van Truoc, O.
- Online Interviewing through Access Panel: Quantity and Quality Assurance; 2009; Petric, I., Appel, M., de Leeuw, E. D.
- The impact of gender in e-mailed survey invitations; 2009; Derham, P.
- Using interactive technology to improve online questionnaire design; 2009; Chen, Te., Estrin, D.
- Faster than a speeding survey: Part II: The physician's perspective; 2009; Maciolek, T., Palish, J.
- An examination of strategies for panel-blending; 2009; Fallig, M. A., Allen, D.
- 10 ways to keep your panel respondents happy; 2009; Hardy, N.
- Survey says: new tools aim to ensure the integrity of online surveys. ; 2009; Quenqua, D.
- Conference interpreters and their self-representation: A worldwide web-based survey ; 2009; Zwischenberger, C.
- Some Practical Issues in Cell Phone Interviewing from a Phone Room Perspective; 2009; Best, J., Hugick, L
- Measurement Error in Cell Phone Surveys; 2009; Kennedy, C., Everett, S. E., Traugott, M. W.
- Cell Phone Mainly and Cell Phone Mostly: A Comparison of Two Approaches to Dual Frame Cell Phone and...; 2009; Boyle, J., Cantor, J.
- PDA vs. Computer Web Survey Respondents; 2009; Stapleton, C
- Using Audio Computer-Assisted Self-Interviewing and Interactive Voice Response to Measure Elder Mistreatment...; 2009; Beach, S., Schultz, M., Degenholtz, H., Castle, N., Rosen, J., Fox, A., Meisel, A., Morycz, R.
- Exploring Inherent Differences Between CARI and Non-CARI Interviews; 2009; Sage, A., Keating, M.
- The Use of Advance Contact, Monetary Incentives, and Lotteries to Increase Response Rates in a Web Survey...; 2009; Stevenson, J., Dykema, J., Day, D., Bonham, V., Sellers, S.
- The Effect of Email Invitation Subject Title and Text on Online Survey Completion Rates in Internet...; 2009; Kruse, Y., Thomas, M., Nukulkij, P., Callegaro, M.
- Words, Numbers and Visual Heuristics in Web Surveys: Is There a Hierarchy of Importance?; 2009; Toepoel, V., Dillman, D. A.
- Web of Caring: Development of Web-Survey Best Practices; 2009; Ballou, J., Roff, B.
- Cell-Only Adults Versus Cell-Mostly Adults: Does It Make a Difference in the Results; 2009; Battaglia, M. P., Frankel, M. R., Balluz, L. S.
- Shifting Samples: The Impact of Wireless Substitution on National Estimates in RDD Surveys; 2009; Hannah, K.
- The Coverage Bias of Mobile Web Surveys; 2009; Fuchs, M.
- Refined or Biased Opinions? Examining Self-Selected Participation in Deliberation and Post-Survey in...; 2009; Wang, R., Siu, A.
- Mechanisms of Nonresponse in Cell Phone Surveys; 2009; Kennedy, C., Everett, S. E., Traugott, M. W.
- The Introduction of a Cell Phone Oversample to the Ohio Family Health Survey: Covering the Undercovered...; 2009; Duffy, T., Iachan, R., Bausch, S., Muzzy, S., ZuWallack, R. S.
- Examining the Relationship Between Survey Response Elicitation Efforts, Response Motivation, and Satisficing...; 2009; Lee, G., Rao, K.
- An Experiment in Using Prepaid Cell Phones to Interview Households Without an Available Phone Number; 2009; Brooks, K., Jaszczak, A., Wooten, K.
- Conducting Virtual Survey Research: RTI’s Facility in the Online Community Second Life®; 2009; Dean, E., Hill, C.
- Attrition in a Face-to-Face Recruited Internet Panel with Substantial Incentives; 2009; Malka, A., Krosnick, J. A., Ackermann, A., Debell, M., Turakhia, C.
- Lessons Learned About How to Accomplish Effective In- Person Recruitment of a Web-Equipped Survey Panel...; 2009; Ackermann, A., Krosnick, J. A., Turakhia, C., Debell, M., Malka, A., Jarmon, R.
- Comparing an Internet Panel Survey to Mail and Phone Surveys on “Willingness to Pay” for...; 2009; Grandjean, B. D., Taylor, P. A., Nelson, N. M.
- Comparison Study of Probability and Non-Probability Sample Surveys Conducted by Internet and Face to...; 2009; Yeager, D. S., Krosnick, J. A.
- Do They Mean What They Say? Efficacy Evaluation of Assigning Sample Members Without a Mode Preference...; 2009; Brown, S. M., Grigorian, K. H.
- Cost and Quality in Low-Cost Survey Alternatives: A Comparison of Mail Versus Web; 2009; Dutwin, D., Donelan, K.
- Online Opinions: A Pilot Study to Extend the UK's Social Data Collection Capabilities; 2009; Dunn, E.
- Text-Message Surveys: Results in a Flash; 2009; Uriell, Z. A., Clewis, E.
- Understanding the Political Distinctiveness of the Cell Phone Only Public; 2009; Ansolabehere, S., Schaffner, B. F.
- Inclusion of Mobile-Only Households in Canadian Television Ratings Panels; 2009; Arzumanian, N., Gray, D.
- A Social Profile of the “Wireless-Only” and “Wireless- Mostly” Population; 2009; Barron, M., Wolter, K.
- The Effects of Web and Mail Mixed-Mode Approaches on Response Rates in a Survey of Physicians; 2009; McFarlane, E., Murphy, J., Olmsted, M. G., Severance, J.
- Mode Choice in a Longitudinal Mail/Web/Telephone Survey; 2009; Kovac, M., Rogers, B., Mooney, G., Trunzo, D.
- Decline to Answer: SED Web Respondent Results of Explicit and Passive Item Refusal; 2009; Jimenez, L. M., Welch, V. E., Ahsan, S., Groenhout, B.