Web Survey Bibliography
Several recent studies have investigated the relationship between survey response time (i.e., early or late response), respondent demographic characteristics and their answers to key survey questions, as well as the impact of survey reminder follow-up. These studies have shown that early and late responders often differ in their demographic characteristics as well as in their responses to key attitudinal questions. Often the highest response rate increase follows the initial invitation and various reminder methods, including reminder emails or follow-up mailings which are used to increase response rates throughout the duration of the fielding period. It is important to understand the impact of gathering additional “late” responses through such follow-up campaigns on any potential nonresponse bias. This study examines the results of an anonymous web-based survey, deployed by ICF International, of U.S. Air Force (USAF) Active Duty and civilian spouses at 80 USAF bases worldwide. During the eight-week fielding period, Active Duty members received survey invitations and eight reminders sent via email. Spouses received a 8.5” X 5.5” invitation postcard followed by two 6” X 4” postcard reminders. A total of 56,135 Active Duty members responded, 78% within the first four weeks and 22% in the last four weeks, and a total of 12,342 civilian spouses responded, 64% within the first four weeks, and 36% in the last four weeks. For Active Duty, the average late responder was more likely to be of lower enlisted grade (E1-E4) and female, while no differences were found between demographics among spouses. Both Active Duty and spouse late responders were more likely to rate community and personal satisfaction more positively than early responders. These results suggest that early and late responders may differ, and such potential differences should be considered when designing survey administration fielding and incorporating reminders to encourage the non-respondent population to participate.
Conference Homepage (abstract)
Web survey bibliography - The American Association for Public Opinion Research (AAPOR) 65th Annual Conference, 2010 (30)
- Offering a Web Option in a Mail Survey of Young Adults: Impact on Survey Quality; 2010; Turner, S., Viera Jr., L., Marsh, S. M.
- Investigating Data Quality in Cell Phone Surveying; 2010; Lavrakas, P. J., Tompson, T., Benford, R.
- The Role of Landline and Cell Phone Usage Patterns in Nonreponse Error Potential Among Young Adults...; 2010; Currivan, D. B., Levine, B., Mayo, Ni.
- 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.
- 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.
- Experimental Trial of Benefit Appeals on Completion Rates for the Agricultural Screening Survey; 2010; Atkinson, D., Moore, D., McCarthy, J. S.
- 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.
- 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.
- Potentials and Constraints of Propensity Score Weighting to Improve Web Survey Quality; 2010; Steinmetz, S., Tijdens, K.
- KnowledgePanel®: Processes & Procedures Contributing to Sample Representativeness & Tests for Self...; 2010; Dennis, J. M.
- The Effects of Different Incentives on Data Quantity and Data Quality in Online Panels; 2010; Singh, R. K., Voggeser, B. J., Goeritz, A.
- Maximizing a stratified ABS frame for nation-wide mail recruitment of a probability-based online panel...; 2010; DiSogra, C., Hendarwan, E.