Web Survey Bibliography
Online-Befragungen erfreuen sich zunehmender Beliebtheit, insbesondere scheinen sie sich für Lehrevaluationen zu empfehlen. Die Zuverlässigkeit ihrer Ergebnisse aber ist kaum geprüft. In einem Vergleich der Ergebnisse einer Online-Befragung mit den Ergebnissen einer schriftlichen Befragung in denselben Veranstaltungen zeigen sich gravierende Mängel, die die Ergebnisse der Online-Befragung untauglich werden lassen: 1. ist die Beteiligung der Studierenden an der internet-basierten Erhebung wesentlich geringer als in der Veranstaltungsbefragung (in mehreren Veranstaltungen ist sie zu gering für eine Auswertung). 2. weichen ihre Ergebnisse in allen Veranstaltungen und allen analysierten Fragen von den Ergebnissen der (Voll-)Erhebung in den Veranstaltungen ab, sodass auf ihrer Basis gebildete Rangreihen und -gruppen zu unterschiedlichen Wertungen der Veranstaltungen führen. 3. gibt es Anhaltspunkte dafür, dass die Antworten in einer Online-Evaluation von geringerer Verlässlichkeit sind als in einer schriftlichen Befragung. Das unter arbeitsökonomischen Gesichtspunkten naheliegende Verfahren der Online-Befragung eignet sich daher nicht für eine zuverlässige Bewertung der Qualität der akademischen Lehre.
Online-surveys enjoy increasing popularity and they seem to be especially suited for evaluating the quality of teaching in academic courses. The fact remains, however, that the reliability of their results has hardly been tested. Compared to the results of a written questionnaire carried out with the same university-courses online-surveys demonstrate grave deficiencies. These imperfections render their results useless: 1. Students’ participation in the onlinequestioning is—compared to their participation in the written questionnaire—considerably lower (in several courses too low to be of any analytical use). 2. In the case of all courses and analysed questions the results diverge from those of the written questionnaire which achieved census-quality. Rankings based on these two proceedings differ widely. This occurs regardless of them being set up in individual lists or in groupings. 3. There are clear indications that the way respondents answer online-questionnaires is less reliable than in paper&pencil methods. Although online-surveys benefit by being cost-efficient their methodological shortcomings raise important questions about their reliability for judging the quality of academic teaching.
Journal Homepage (abstract)/(full text)
Web Survey Bibliography - 2010 (393)
- Hatteras Survey System: On-path Validation for a Non-linear Survey Engine; 2010; Suresh, R., Allen, S., Peele, B., Rasmussen, C., Sattler, S., Suresh, P., Warmoth, E.
- Using User Mode Linux For Web Surveys; 2010; Vogel, D.
- Nonresponse Error, Measurement Error and Mode of Data Collection: Tradeoffs in a Multi-Mode Survey; 2010; Sakshaug, J. W., Tourangeau, R., Yan, T.
- Item Non-response Differences Between Web and Mail Surveys of the General Public; 2010; Dillman, D. A., Edwards, M. L., Messer, B. L., Millar, M. M.
- Mode Effect or Question Wording? Source of Measurement Error in Mixed Mode Surveys; 2010; de Leeuw, E. D., Hox, J., Scherpenzeel, A., Stam, S., Zandvliet, R.
- Beyond the Blank-Canvas Approach ; 2010
- When the water is right.; 2010; Andruss, P.
- Online Surveys For Dummies; 2010; Bhaskaran, V., LeClaire, J.
- The Role of Landline and Cell Phone Usage Patterns in Nonreponse Error Potential Among Young Adults...; 2010; Currivan, D. B., Levine, B., Mayo, N.
- Differences in Early and Late Responders: Findings from a Military Web-Based Community Survey.; 2010; Prabhakaran, J., Spera, C., Leach, L. M., Foster, R.
- Assessing Cell Phone Noncoverage Bias Across Different Topics and Subgroups; 2010; Christian, L. M., Keeter, S., Purcell, K., Smith, A.
- Using a Simulation Study to Examine Strategies for Combining Cell and Landline Survey Samples; 2010; Duffy, T., Bausch, S., Iachan, R., Lu, B.
- An Examination of Panel Conditioning in an Advertising Tracking Study with Cross-Sectional Design; 2010; Anderson, A. J., Marsh, K. A., Turner, S., Marsh, S. M.
- The Unusual Suspects for Survey Non-response: A Follow-up Study with Respondents and Non- Respondents...; 2010; Lai, J. W., Bell, S., Link, M., Walker, M., Narciso, L., Jin, T.
- Representing Seniors in an Online National Probability Panel Survey: Measuring Technology Attitudes...; 2010; Peugh, J., Mansfield, W., Wells, T., Semans, K.
- Communicating Disclosure Risk in Informed Consent Statements; 2010; Singer, E., Couper, M. P.
- Meeting the Challenges of Converting a Large Establishment Survey from Paper to Electronic Administration...; 2010; Roe, D. J., Thalji, L., Loft, J., Flicker, L., Stockdale, J., Stagnitti, M.
- Assessing the Accuracy of the Face-to-Face Recruited Internet Survey Platform: A Comparison of Behavioral...; 2010; Villar, A., Malka, A., Krosnick, J. A.
- Internet Panels and Health Research: Findings from National RDD Surveys.; 2010; Boyle, J.
- Item Nonresponse Analysis for a Mixed-Mode Survey.; 2010; Lorenc, B., Olsson, K.
- Significant Factors Governing the Use of Auditory Stimuli in Web Questionnaires; 2010; Utami, S. S., Dawood, R., Navvab, M.
- The Subject Lines of Web Survey Invitations and Participation Rates; 2010; Titiz, H., Ziniel, S.
- When to Email or Not?: Determining the Best Day of the Week to Send Evites For Participation in a Web...; 2010; Epps, S. R., Hall, L., Hunter, J. A.Hall, L. M.
- Experimental Trial of Benefit Appeals on Completion Rates for the Agricultural Screening Survey; 2010; Atkinson, D., Moore, D., McCarthy, J. S.
- Mode Effect or Question Wording? Developing Robust Questions for Mixed Mode Surveys; 2010; de Leeuw, E. D., Scherpenzeel, A.
- Using Overt and Covert Survey Traps to Maximize Data Quality; 2010; Cardador, J., Wayman, M., Sheridan, M.
- Professional Web Respondents and Data Quality; 2010; Conrad, F. G., Tourangeau, R., Couper, M. P., Zhang, C.
- Does Making The Survey Topic More Salient Lead To An Expert Bias? – The Influence of Announcing...; 2010; Keusch, F., Mayerhofer, W., Weilbuchner, N., Jungreithmaier, S.
- Time Related Inconsistencies in Global Online Panels; 2010; Gittelman, S. H., Trimarchi, E.
- Study of Non-Probability Sample Internet Surveys' Estimates of Consumer Product Usage and Demographic...; 2010; Yeager, D. S., Carter, A., Tewoldemedhin, H., Krosnick, J. A.
- Nonresponse Bias and the Impact of Incentives in a Survey of Physician Members of a Professional Organization...; 2010; Buttermore, N. R.
- Economic or Social Exchange: Examining the Effects of Different Incentive Amounts in a Panel Study; 2010; Boulianne, S. J.
- The Effectiveness of an Interactive Web Survey in Decreasing Satisficing and Social Desirability Bias...; 2010; Walejko, G. K.
- Response Behaviors in Self-Administered Multiple Questionnaire Surveys; 2010; Lacey, J. N., Ramirez, C. M.
- Experimental Tests on Response Rates in Student Web Surveys: What Works and What Doesn’t; 2010; Bloom, J. D.
- Web Surveys when Databases have Incomplete Email Records: The Impact of Modifying the Method of Respondent...; 2010; Elasmar, M. G.
- An Experiment to Test the Feasibility and Quality of a Web-Based Questionnaire of Teachers; 2010; Jacob, R., Scott, L., Rowan, B.
- Web Questionnaire Usage in an Establishment Survey; 2010; Harris, S. J., Biemer, P. P., Penne, M. A.
- Visual vs. Aural Surveys: Examining the Similarities and Differences Between Survey Modes; 2010; Stapleton, C.
- Emulating Interviewers in an Online Survey: Experimental Manipulation of ‘Do-Not-Know’ Over...; 2010; Hox, J.
- The Effectiveness of Multiple Modes Among Young Adults; 2010; Anderson-Knott, M., Jorgensen, S., Armitage, J.
- Mode Effect Analysis: Paper respondents vs. Web respondents in the 2004-05 Teacher Follow-up Survey; 2010; Aritomi, T., Hill, J.
- Long-Term Efficacy of Sequential Mixed-Mode Designs on Response Rates and Cost in a Panel Survey; 2010; Levenstein, R. M., Barber, J. S., Gatny, H. H.
- Probability of Selecting Response Mode Between Paper- and Web-Based Options: Logistic Model Based on...; 2010; Murray, M.
- Impact of Monetary Incentives and Web Survey Option in the 2008 National Survey of Recent College Graduates...; 2010; Heaviside, S., Jang, D., Mooney, G., Barrett, K., Kang, K. H.
- Response Mode and Bias Analysis in the IRS' Individual Taxpayer Burden Survey; 2010; Masken, K., Contos, G., Nord, R., Brick, J. M.
- Diversity of Methods: Assessment of Quantitative and Qualitative Research Multiplier Effects.; 2010; Ballou, J., Roff, B., Anderson, M.
- Potentials and Constraints of Propensity Score Weighting to Improve Web Survey Quality; 2010; Steinmetz, S., Tijdens, K.
- Differences in Length of Survey Administration between Spanish-Language and English- Language Survey...; 2010; Wells, T., Vidalon, M., DiSogra, C.
- Completing Web Surveys on Smart Phones; 2010; Dayton, J. J., Freedner, N., Hannah, K.

