Web Survey Bibliography
The item count technique, used often to investigate illegal or socially undesirable behaviours, requires respondents to indicate merely the number of applicable items from among a list. However, the number of applicable items indicated via the item count question tends to be smaller than when it is calculated from the direct `applies/does not apply' responses to each item. Because this inconsistency, which we refer to as the underreporting effect, often disturbs proper item count estimates, the causes of this effect are explored in this paper. Web survey results revealed that the order of the response alternatives is irrelevant to the underreporting effect, and that the underreporting effect is caused by the response format in which the item count question requests merely the number of applicable items and not the number of non-applicable items. It is also shown that the magnitude of the underreporting effect decreases when the respondents are asked to indicate the numbers of both applicable and non-applicable items, which we refer to as elaborate item count questioning.
Journal Homepage (abstract) / (full text)
Web survey bibliography - Survey Research Methods (34)
- Reducing speeding in web surveys by providing immediate feedback; 2017; Conrad, F.; Tourangeau, R.; Couper, M. P.; Zhang, C.
- Can we assess representativeness of cross-national surveys using the education variable?; 2016; Ortmanns, V.; Schneider, S.
- Smartphones vs PCs: Does the Device Affect the Web Survey Experience and the Measurement Error for...; 2016; Toninelli, D.; Revilla, M.
- Are Final Comments in Web Survey Panels Associated with Next-Wave Attrition?; 2016; McLauchlan, C.; Schonlau, M.
- Sensitive Questions in Online Surveys: An Experimental Evaluation of Different Implementations of the...; 2016; Hoglinger, M.; Jann, B.; Diekmann, A.
- Helping respondents provide good answers in Web surveys; 2016; Couper, M. P.; Zhang, C.
- Stable Relationships, Stable Participation? The Effects of Partnership Dissolution and Changes in Relationship...; 2016; Mueller, B.; Castiglioni, L.
- Identifying Pertinent Variables for Nonresponse Follow-Up Surveys. Lessons Learned from 4 Cases in Switzerland...; 2016; Vandenplas, C.; Joye, D.; Staehli, M. E.; Pollien, A.
- Sunday shopping – The case of three surveys; 2016; Bethlehem, J.
- Revisiting “yes/no” versus “check all that apply”: Results from a mixed modes...; 2016; Nicolaas, G.; Campanelli, P.; Hope, S.; Jaeckle, A.; Lynn, P.
- Going Online with a Face-to-Face Household Panel: Effects of a Mixed Mode Design on Item and Unit Non...; 2015; Burton, J.; Jaeckle, A.; Lynn, P.
- Impact of mixed modes on measurement errors and estimates of change in panel data; 2015; Cernat, A.
- Is Vague Valid? The Comparative Predictive Validity of Vague Quantifiers and Numeric Response Options...; 2014; Al Baghal, T.
- The Effect of Answering in a Preferred Versus a Non-Preferred Survey Mode on Measurement; 2014; Smyth, J. D., Olson, K., Kasabian, A.
- Speeding in Web Surveys: The tendency to answer very fast and its association with straightlining; 2013; Conrad, F. G.; Zhang, Che.
- The Recruitment of the Access Panel of German Official Statistics from a Large Survey in 2006: Empirical...; 2013; Amarov, B.; Rendtel, U.
- Relative Mode Effects on Data Quality in Mixed-Mode Surveys by an Instrumental Variable; 2013; Vannieuwenhuyze, J. T. A., Revilla, M.
- Is the Sky Falling? New Technology, Changing Media, and the Future of Surveys; 2013; Couper, M. P.
- On the Impact of Response Patterns on Survey Estimates from Access Panels; 2013; Enderle, T., Muennich, R., Bruch, C.
- Survey Breakoffs in a Computer-Assisted Telephone Interview; 2013; McGonagle, K.
- Informed Consent for Web Paradata Use; 2013; Couper, M. P., Singer, E.
- Measurement invariance and quality of composite scores in a face-to-face and a web survey; 2013; Revilla, M.
- Assessing the Magnitude of Non-Consent Biases in Linked Survey and Administrative Data; 2012; Sakshaug, J. W., Kreuter, F.
- Quality in Unimode and Mixed-Mode designs: A Multitrait-Multimethod approach; 2010; Revilla, M.
- Elaborate Item Count Questioning: Why Do People Underreport in Item Count Responses?; 2010; Hirai, Y., Tsuchiya, Ta.
- The impact of incentives and interview methods on response quantity and quality in diary- and booklet...; 2010; Bonke, J., Fallesen, P.
- Does Visual Appeal Matter? Effects of Web Survey Aesthetics on Survey Quality; 2010; Mahon-Haft, T., Dillman, D. A.
- The Mobile-only Population in Portugal and Its Impact in a Dual Frame Telephone Survey; 2009; Vicente, P., Reis, E.
- Impact of mixed survey modes on physical activity and fruit/vegetable consumption: A longitudinal study...; 2009; Nigg, C. R., Motl, R. W., Wong, K. T., Yoda L. U., McCurdy, D. K., Paxton, R., Horwath, C. C., Dishman...
- Nonresponse in the Recruitment of an Internet Panel Based on Probability Sampling; 2009; Hoogendoorn, A., Daalmans, J.
- Differential response rates in postal and Web-based surveys in older respondents; 2009; Bech, M., Kristensen, M. B.
- An evaluation of the weighting procedures for an online access panel survey; 2008; Loosveldt, G., Sonck, N.
- Internet Surveys: Can Statistical Adjustments Eliminate Coverage Bias?; 2008; Dever, J. A., Rafferty, A., Valliant, R. L.
- Estimation of the effects of measurement characteristics on the quality of survey questions; 2007; Saris, W. E., Gallhofer, I.