Web Survey Bibliography
Relevance and research question:
Self-selected survey participants typically differ from the general population with regard to demographic variables that are important for voting behaviour. For example, elderly persons and persons with a low educational level are usually underrepresented. To forecast the result of elections based on such non-probability samples, it is therefore necessary to statistically adjust for selection bias. We investigated whether the validity of an election forecast can be improved using propensity scores which rely on demographic characteristics to model the propensity to participate in web surveys.
Methods and data:
In the week prior to the 2009 German federal election to the Bundestag/Lower House of the Parliament, we surveyed a large self-selected sample of potential voters. Recording several demographic variables that are presumably relevant for political preferences, we also asked the participants to indicate their voting intention in the upcoming election. We then computed predictions for the outcome of the election using propensity score adjustments based on official Mikrozensus data. We compared these predictions with the outcome of the election, and also tested whether propensity adjusted Web-based convenience samples allow for a prediction that is competitive with probability sample-based benchmark estimates.
Results:
We found that propensity score adjustments were able to considerably improve the predictive validity of an Internet-based survey of a non-random sample of potential voters, leading to a much better forecast of the election outcome. Our results thus document the usefulness of propensity scores to improve the validity of election forecasts. However, we also noted several limitations of the approach.
Added value:
Propensity score adjustments are increasingly being used to control for selection bias, but there are few opportunities to validate this approach against external criteria. Forecasting the outcome of an election is a rare but important exception, because adjusted and unadjusted predictions can be directly compared to an election’s official result.
Conference Homepage (abstract)
Web survey bibliography - 2010 (251)
- An Experiment to Test the Feasibility and Quality of a Web-Based Questionnaire of Teachers; 2010; Jacob, R., Scott, L., Rowan, B.
- 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.
- Does Providing a Choice of Survey Modes Influence Response?; 2010; Lesser, V. M., Newton, L., Yang, D.
- Improving Response to Mail and Web Mixed-Mode Surveys: The Effects of Offering Choice on Survey Response...; 2010; Millar, M. M., Dillman, D. A.
- Participant Dropout as a Function of Survey Length in Internet-Mediated University Studies: Implications...; 2010; Hoerger, M.
- Internet Access: Is Everyone Online Yet and Can We Survey Them There?; 2010; Smith, Co., Spitz, G.
- Panel management in a mixed-mode (Web/mobile) research world ; 2010; Townsend, L.
- Testing the Applicability of Respondent Driven Sampling as an Online Research Method to Sample Hidden...; 2010; Pajak, D.
- Seriousness Checks are Useful to Improve Data Validity in Online Research; 2010; Diedenhofen, D., Aust, F., Ullrich, S., Musch, J.
- Enrichment of Qualitative Research through Online Approaches: New Insights due to Online CoCreation...; 2010; Krischke-Ramaswamy, M., Knorr, H.
- Developing and Evaluating a Student Online Panel.; 2010; Stiglbauer, B., Gamsjäger, M., Gnambs, T., Batinic, B., Altrichter, H.
- Online Access Panels: A detailed look at different Ways of Entering, their Costs and Participation Behavior...; 2010; Führer, R., Keusch, F.
- Eye Tracking and Cognitive Interviewing: Steps to improve online questionnaires; 2010; Tries, S., Sattelberger, S.
- Trial by Ordeal, a medieval approach to a modern day problem; 2010; Cape, P., Cavallaro, K.
- How new engagement techniques and question approaches are revolutionizing online research data gathering...; 2010; Puleston, J.
- Social Networking Sites: New approaches for Online-Panels?; 2010; Drosdow, M., Geißler, H.
- The Impact of Visual and Functional Design Elements in Online Survey Research; 2010; Hammen, K.
- Theoretical model of context-sensitive mobile methods; 2010; Maxl, E.
- Can a professional questionnaire layout make up for a boring topic? The mediating role of topic interest...; 2010; Keusch, F., Mayerhofer, W., Jungreithmaier, S., Weilbuchner, N., Fuehrer, R., Kling, H.
- Using Propensity Score Weighting to Reduce Bias of a Swiss Market Research Web Panel; 2010; Wiegand, G., Jella, H., Beat, H., Stefan, L.
- Potentials and Constraints of Propensity Score Weighting to Improve Web Survey Quality; 2010; Steinmetz, S., Tijdens, K.
- Are well-selected panelists better respondents? Insights into the effect of a master screener on panel...; 2010; Irmer, C., Tress, F.
- Selection Bias in Web Surveys and the Use of Propensity Scores in Forecasting the Result of the 2009...; 2010; Musch, J., Ullrich, S., Diedenhofen, D.
- KnowledgePanel®: Processes & Procedures Contributing to Sample Representativeness & Tests for Self...; 2010; Dennis, J. M.
- A Comparison of Psychometric Properties Between Internet and Paper Versions of Two Depression Instruments...; 2010; Andersson, G., Engstroem, I., Hollaendare, F.
- Combining Link-Tracing Sampling and Cluster Sampling to Estimate Totals and Means of Hidden Human Populations...; 2010; Félix-Medina, M. H., Monjardin, P. E.
- Increasing Respondents' Use of Definitions in Web Surveys; 2010; Peytchev, A., Conrad, F. G., Couper, M. P., Tourangeau, R.
- 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.
- Some Notes on the Probability Space of Statistical Surveys; 2010; Petrakos, G.
- Use of a Web-based Questionnaire in the Black Women's Health Study; 2010; Boggs, D. A., Palmer, J. R., Rosenberg, L., Russell, C. W.
- Reaching Emergency Medical Services Providers: Is One Survey Mode Better than Another?; 2010; Schmuhl, P., Van Duker, H., Gurley, K. L., Webster, A., Olson, L. M.
- Web-based Questionnaires: The Future in Epidemiology?; 2010; van Gelder, M. M. H. J, Bretveld, R. W., Roeleveld, N.
- Statistical foundations of cell-phone surveys; 2010; Wolter, K., Smith, P., Blumberg, S. J.
- Epidemiologic Research and Web 2.0—the User-driven Web; 2010; Lee, B. K.
- Developing a Research Framework for Usability in Online Surveys: Human-Survey Interaction; 2010; Kaczmirek, L.
- Online Survey Research in the Work-Family Field: Basic Concepts and Definitions; 2010; Lambert, A. D.
- Choosing Between Telephone and Online for Survey Data Collection ; 2010; Baker, R. P.
- Results of Targeting Pre-Identified Minority, Unidentified Non-Internet and Vacant Homes in Two National...; 2010; DiSogra, C., Hendarwan, E.
- Using KnowledgePanel® to Improve the Sample Representativeness and Accuracy of Opt-in Panel Data...; 2010; Dennis, J. M., Peugh, J., Graham, P.
- Self-administered mobile surveys: Usability and (non)participation; 2010; Scherrer, S., Bosnjak, M.
- Web panels: Replacement technology for market research; 2010; Goeritz, A.
- Social desirability and self-reported health risk behaviors in web-based research: three longitudinal...; 2010; Crutzen, R., Goeritz, A.
- Security and Data Protection: Collection, Storage, Feedback in Internet Research; 2010; Thiele, O., Kaczmirek, L.
- Designing Web Surveys in Marketing Research: Does Use of Forced Answering Affect Completion Rates?; 2010; Albaum, G., Roster, C. A.,Wiley, J. B., Rossiter, J., Smith, S. M.
- Methoden der Online-Forschung; 2010; Welker, M., Wünsch, C.
- Online-Befragungen im Kontext von Lehrevaluationen – praktisch und unzuverlässig; 2010; Meinefeld, W.
- AAPOR Report on Online Panels; 2010; P., Blumberg, S. J., Brick, J. M., Rivers, D. et. al.Baker, R. P.