Web Survey Bibliography
The visual capabilities offered by the internet provide a platform by which magazine readers may be queried about their viewing, noting and recognizing of ad copy appearing in specific magazine issues. However, it is well known that “samples” used in these studies may be subject to substantial bias arising from the non-probability nature of the sample selection process. Furthermore, when correctly computed, the response rates on many internet panels are quite low. In those situations when certain key variables are statistically linked (i.e. strongly correlated) with sample selection bias and key substantive outcomes, these variables may be used to adjust or calibrate these estimates. This is sometimes known as post stratification in traditional full-probability sampling and model-based estimation for model based (non-probability) sampling. In examining a large number of internet samples used to collect data on ad-noting and ad recognition it is has been found that these outcome measures are associated and correlated, to varying degrees, with gender, time spent reading, place of reading, percent of pages opened, and frequency of reading. Furthermore, we have found the distribution of these variables among internet respondents is substantially different from those in traditional full-probability surveys. We have developed a series of sample weighting procedures to remove a substantial amount of the “selection bias” linked to these reading qualities. This bias reduction step results in meaningful changes in readership ad-noting and ad identification. This paper will show, using actual data, how our approach to bias reduction weighting was developed, and how it impacts the outcomes of ad-noting and identification. In our decision to apply these weights we have adopted a standard minimization of mean squared error approach and perspective. That is, any weighting which increases variable random error must be offset with bias reduction. Bias reduction occurs when changes in the survey estimates are observed. Within a single magazine issue, the overall changes in ad noting scores are not typically large. However, there are ads in which noting scores do show substantial change. These changes are consistent with expectations linked to the adjustment measures. Furthermore, while an outside validation of the model based estimates has not been undertaken, our examination of overall impact across magazines is highly consistent with those expected on the basis of the variables involved. Thus, while we do not claim that our results are externally validated, we are comfortable in saying that the adjustments are in the expected direction and appear to make sense.
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.