Web Survey Bibliography
Relevance and research question: Nonserious answering is one of the most important threats to the validity of online research (Oppenheimer, 2009). Respondents with little motivation to participate, or respondents who are interested in a survey's content or methodology only may decide to participate without giving serious answers, thus increasing noise and reducing experimental power.
Methods and data: One approach to identifying nonserious participants is to directly ask respondents about the seriousness of their participation (Klauer, Musch & Naumer, 2000; Musch & Klauer, 2002; Reips, 2000, 2002). We hypothesized that when given an opportunity to do so, randomly answering participants might be willing to identify themselves to help researchers (Reips, 2009). To validate this approach, we questioned a sample of more than 3000 respondents in the week prior to the German 2009 federal election to the Bundestag. We asked the participants whether they were responding to the questions in earnest, expecting that the exclusion of nonserious participants would help to improve data quality.
Results: We found that restricting analyses to serious participants allowed a more valid forecast of the election result. Moreover, serious participants answered attitudinal questions in a more consistent manner than nonserious participants. For example, among serious participants, self-ratings on a left-right scale correlated more strongly with approval ratings for the two major parties (CDU/CSU and SPD), and intentions to vote corresponded better with the participant’s recollections of their voting behavior in a previous election.
Added value: Taken together, our results document the usefulness of employing seriousness checks to improve data validity. We therefore recommend to routinely employ seriousness checks in online surveys. Nonserious participants should be allowed to render their data invalid, instead of letting their data invalidate the results.
Conference Homepage (abstract)
Springer Homepage (abstract) / (full text)
Web survey bibliography - Germany (361)
- Mobile, webmail, desktops: Where are we viewing email now?; 2011
- Assessing personality traits through response latencies using item response theory; 2011; Ranger, J., Ortner, T. M.
- Web-based rating scales: HTML 5 and other innovations; 2011; Funke, F.
- E-dater, Artificial Actors, and German Households; 2011; Hebing, M.
- Seeing Through the Eyes of the Respondent: An Eye-tracking Study on Survey Question Comprehension; 2011; Lenzner, A., Kaczmirek, L., Galesic, M.
- Eye Tracking in testing questionnaires: What’s the added value?; 2011; Tries, S.
- Improving validity in web surveys with hard‐to‐reach targets: Online Respondent Driven Sampling...; 2011; Mavletova, A. M.
- Ignoring the compatibility of online questionnaires may bias the psychological composition of your sample...; 2011; Funke, F.
- Video enhanced web survey; 2011; Fuchs, M., Kunz, T., Gebhard, F.
- Scrolling or paging - it depends; 2011; Blanke, K.
- The German Access Panel and the Impact of Response Propensities; 2011; Amarov, B., Enderle, T., Muennich, R., Rendtel, U., Zins, S.
- A new approach to the analysis of survey drop-out. Results from Follow-up Surveys in the German Longitudinal...; 2011; Rossmann, J., Blumenstiel, J. E., Steinbrecher, M.
- Tracking the decision-making process – Findings from an Online Rolling Cross-Section Panel Study...; 2011; Faas, T.
- From "Web Questions" to "Propensity Score Weighting": An Evaluation of Topics and...; 2011; Welker, M., Taddicken, M.
- Rich Profiles – Or: What's the problem with self-disclosure data?; 2011; Tress, F.
- Mobile Research Apps – Adding New Capabilities to Market Research; 2011; Rieber, D.
- The influence of personality traits and motives for joining on participation behavior in online panels...; 2011; Keusch, F.
- Asking sensitive questions in a recruitment interview for an online panel: the income question; 2011; Schaurer, I., Struminskaya, B., Kaczmirek, L., Bandilla, W.
- Speeders in Online Value Research: Cross-checking results of fast and slow respondents in two separate...; 2011; Beckers, T., Siegers, P., Kuntz, A.
- Effects of survey question clarity on data quality; 2011; Lenzner, T.
- Lösungsansätze gegen den Allgemeinarztmangel auf dem Land - Ergebnisse einer Online-Befragung unter Ä...; 2011; Steinhäuser, J., Annan, N. F., Roos, M., Szecsenyi, J., Joos, S.
- Question Comprehensibility and Satisficing Behavior in Web Surveys; 2011; Lenzner, T.
- Agree-Disagree Response Format versus Importance Judgment; 2011; Krebs, D.
- Germans' segregation preferences and immigrant group size: A factorial survey approach; 2011; Schlueter, E., Ullrich, J., Schmidt, P.
- Benefits of Structured DDI Metadata across the Data Lifecycle: The STARDAT Project at the GESIS Data...; 2011; Linne, M., Brislinger, E., Zenk-Moeltgen, W.
- Microdata Information System MISSY; 2011; Bohr, J.,
- Explaining more variance with visual analogue scales: A Web experiment; 2011; Funke, F.
- Cognitive process in answering questions: Are verbal labels in rating scales attended to?; 2011; Menold, N., Kaczmirek, L., Lenzner, T.
- Experiments on the Design of the Left-Right Self-Assessment Scale; 2011; Zuell, C., Scholz, E., Behr, D.
- Separating selection from mode effects when switching from single (CATI) to mixed mode design (CATI /...; 2011; Carstensen, J., Kriwy, P., Krug, G., Lange, C.
- Asking Sensitive Questions: Do They Affect Participation In Follow-Up Surveys?; 2011; Schaurer, I., Struminskaya, B., Kaczmirek, L., Bandilla, W.
- Does social desirability compromise self-reports of physical activity in web-based research?; 2011; Crutzen, R., Goeritz, A.
- Testing for measurement equivalence of human values across online and paper-and-pencil surveys; 2011; Davidov, E., Depner, F.
- The use of paradata to monitor and manage survey data collection; 2010; Kreuter, F., Couper, M. P., Lyberg, L. E.
- Optimizing response rates in online surveys; 2010; Kaczmirek, L.
- There is an app for that! A review of smartphone apps for marketing research; 2010; Michelson, M.
- Innovative mobile research in developing countries; 2010; Bellity, E.
- Mobile location based research: Cross cultural examination of coffee culture; 2010; Morden, M., Ferneyhough, C., Grenville, A.
- Online research….and all that Jazz!; 2010; Gittelman, S. H., Trimarchi, E.
- Why are we trying to create new communities for market research purposes?; 2010; Pearson, C., Kateley, V.
- Internet-Based Measurement With Visual Analogue Scales: An Experimental Investigation; 2010; Funke, F.
- Managing the knowledge base - the DUVA system, from data entry to output tools; 2010; Then, R., Bangert, D.
- Recruiting Online Panel Members from a Mail survey in the General Population: Results from an Exploratory...; 2010; Reuband, K. H.
- 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.
- Eye Tracking and Cognitive Interviewing: Steps to improve online questionnaires; 2010; Tries, S., Sattelberger, S.
- 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.