Web Survey Bibliography
a) Relevance & Research Question:
Swiss based market and social research institute LINK and the University of Applied Sciences Northwestern Switzerland collaborated on a two year project to develop methods to measure and reduce the bias of surveys, accomplished with the LINK web-panel, the largest Swiss panel with random selection.
b) Methods & Data:
The bias shall be reduced by applying a weighting scheme based on propensity scores. The success depends mainly on the choice of covariates.
To determine which variables serve best to model the response propensity we have conducted an experimental survey. In a CATI survey, people were asked questions concerning psychological characteristics (Big Five Scale), about their set of values (Schwartz Scale), about the perceived costs and benefits from surveys and their internet behavior. Simultaneously, the CATI served as a recruitment interview for the web-panel.
After checking which of the willing CATI respondentsactually did react to their first online survey invitation, we developed a model to predict the response behavior. This model allowed us to boil down the set of possible explaining variables, to a few. These variables are the basis for calculating the propensity scores.
To allow a thorough study of the resulting estimators and their variances we conduct Monte-Carlo-simulations. Observed missing value mechanisms have been implemented and modified to compare estimations with propensity-score weighted data with the universe.
The experimental survey has been conducted so far and could be analyzed. The response behavior has been modeled and some crucial variables have been identified. We can show the explanatory power of the proposed scales. The next step is to start the simulations. First results are expected by the end of the year.
d) Added Value:
Our project is a comprehensive study about applying propensity scores as a method to reduce bias in a well established web panel. We are able to implement easy to use methods in every day web-panel research.
Conference Homepage (abstract)
Web Survey Bibliography (259)
- Ten questions to ask your online survey provider; 2013; Williams, D.
- Practical tools for designing and weighting survey samples; 2013; Valliant, R. L., Daver, J. A., Kreuter, F.
- Measuring Wages Worldwide: Exploring the Potentials and Constraints of Volunteer Web Surveys; 2013; Steinmetz, S., Raess, D., Tijdens, K., de Pedraza, P.
- Moving an established survey online – or not?; 2013; Barber, T., Chilvers, D., Kaul, S.
- The comparison of road safety survey answers between web-panel and face-to-face; Dutch results of SARTRE...; 2013; Goldenbeld, C., de Craen, S.
- Measuring working conditions in a volunteer web survey; 2013; de Pedraza, P., Villacampa, A.
- Propensity Score Weighting – Can Personality Adjust for Selectivity?; 2013; Glantz, A., Greszki, R.
- The rise of the "connected viewer"; 2012; Smith, A., Boyles, J. L.
- Eurobarometer Special surveys: Special Eurobarometer 381; 2012
- Computation of Survey Weights: Bridging Theory and Practice; 2012; Debell, M.
- Modes of Data Collection; 2012; Tourangeau, R.
- An experimental investigation of the effects of noncontingent and contingent incentives in recruiting...; 2012; Lavrakas, P. J., Dennis, J. M., Peugh, J., Shand-Lubbers, J., Lee, E., Peugh, J., Charlebois, O., Murakami...
- Rules of engagement: The war against poorly engaged respondents - guidelines for elimination; 2012; Gittelman, S. H., Trimarchi, E.
- Web Panels; 2012; Bethlehem, J., Biffignandi, S.
- Use of Response Propensities; 2012; Bethlehem, J., Biffignandi, S.
- Weighting Adjustment Techniques; 2012; Bethlehem, J., Biffignandi, S.
- The Problem of Self-Selection; 2012; Bethlehem, J.,Biffignandi, S.
- The Problem of Undercoverage; 2012; Bethlehem, J., Biffignandi, S.
- Respondent-driven sampling; 2012; Schonlau, M., Liebau, E.
- A Structural Analysis Based on Similarity between Fuzzy Clusters and Its Application to Evaluation Data...; 2012; Chiba, R., Furutani, T., Sato-Ilic, M.
- Why one should incorporate the design weights when adjusting for unit nonresponse using response homogeneity...; 2012; Kott, P. S.
- Cell Sample Demographics under Alternative Dual-Frame Sample Designs; 2012; Montgomery, R., Morrison, H., Zeng, W., Wolter, K., Blumberg, S. J., O'Connor, K.
- Data Quality from Low Cost Data Collection Methodologies; 2012; Traugott, M. W.
- To Weight, or Not to Weight, That is the Question: Survey Weights and Multivariate Analysis; 2012; Young, R., Johnson, D. R.
- Multiple Imputation for Unit Nonresponse and Measurement Error; 2012; Peytchev, A.
- Assessing the Quality of Survey Data ; 2012; Blasius, J.
- Collecting, Managing, and Assessing Data Using Sample Surveys; 2012; Stopher, P.
- Online survey research: Findings, best practices, and future research. Report prepared for the Advertising...; 2011; Vannette, D.
- Online survey research: Findings, Best practices, and future research; 2011
- Just published: Forrester Wave™ of enterprise feedback management satisfaction and loyalty solutions...; 2011; McInnes, A.
- In search of a new approach to measure newspaper audiences in Canada: The journey continues; 2011; Crassweller, A. et al.
- Households with Computers, Telephone Subscriptions, and Internet Access, Selected Years, 1997 - 2010; 2011
- Eurobarometer Special surveys: EB75.1 E-Communications Household Survey. Special Eurobarometer 362; 2011
- A meta-analysis of experiments manipulating progress indicators in Web surveys; 2011; Callegaro, M., Villar, A., Yang, Y.
- The Evolution of Edits in the Canadian Census of Population Online Questionnaires; 2011; Laroche, D.
- Current Projects at University of Ljubljana; 2011; Lozar Manfreda, K.
- Maintaining Cross-Sectional Representativeness in a Longitudinal General Population Survey ; 2011; Lynn, P.
- The German Access Panel and the Impact of Response Propensities; 2011; Amarov, B., Enderle, T., Muennich, R., Rendtel, U., Zins, S.
- A Bayesian analysis of small area probabilities under a constraint; 2011; Nandram, B., Sayit, H.
- The Impact of Non-Response Treatments on the Stability of Blockmodels; 2011; Znidarsic, A., Ferligoj, A., Doreian, P.
- test; 2011; Aadland, D.; Øverlien, C.; Abbott, R. D.; Abels, E. G.
- Research on Internet survey errors and control methods; 2011; Mingyue, F., Xicang, Z.
- Separation of selection bias and mode effect in mixed-mode survey – Application to the face-to...; 2011; Bayart, C., Bonnel, P.
- Social Climate Survey of Tobacco Control: A mixed-mode approach; 2011; Klein, J. D., McMillen, R.
- Exploring use of information in paradata through calibration method to detect and adjust non-response...; 2011; Billiet, J. Matsuo, H.
- Assessment of propensity score methods on nonresponse bias adjustment; 2011; Alanya, A., Billiet, J., Matsuo, H.
- Nonsampling errors in dual frame telephone surveys ; 2011; Brick, J. M., Flores Cervantes, I., Lee, S., Norman, G.
- Handbook of Nonresponse in Household Surveys ; 2011; Bethlehem, J., Cobben, F., Schouten, B.
- Dropout in Web-based studies: Methodology; 2011; Reips, U. -D.
- Applying maximum entropy weighting to on line panel data collection; 2011; Bianchi, A., Biffignandi, S., Hartmann, E., Sekhon, J.