Web Survey Bibliography
Attitude measurement in web surveys mostly relies on requiring respondents to indicate their agreement or disagreement with each of several items under the same Likert-type scale in a grid format. As it is known that respondents do not only attend to the words that convey the questions but also to the visual language of a questionnaire (i.e., format and shape of response scales, verbal and numerical labels of scale points, spacing, positioning, and order of response options) it is essential to understand how this effects the response process. Although there is no conclusive evidence about the influence of the direction of extreme point labeling (e.g., Belson, 1966; Friedman et al., 1993; Salzberger & Koller, 2010; Weng & Cheng, 2000), applying the ―near means related‖ heuristic (Tourangeau et al., 2004; 2007) to horizontal Likert-type scales would suggest that the proximity between the item and the positive anchor of the scale in a agree-to-disagree format would lead to different results than a reversed scale (disagree-toagree format). This study aims to bring forward how the direction of Likert-type scales in grid formats influences the response behavior of different respondent groups. In two independent web surveys with online panel members and professionals respondents were assigned to one of four treatment groups. The direction of Likert-type scales as well as the use of numerical labeling of scale points was experimentally varied in a full-factorial 2 (agree-to-disagree vs. disagree-to-agree) x 2 (with numerical labels vs. without numerical labels) design. The influence of scale presentation was measured on different indicators of data quality (response latency, item omission, non-differentiation in grids, response sets).
AAPOR Homepage (abstract)
GOR Homepage (abstract) / (presentation)
Web Survey Bibliography - 2011 (566)
- Development of a Web-Based Survey for Monitoring Daily Health and its Application in an Epidemiological...; 2011; Sugiura, H., Ohkusa, Y., Akahane, M., Sano, T., Okabe, N., Imamura, T.
- Sampling v. Scale: An investigation the tension between convenience sampling, response rates, probability...; 2011; Garland, P.
- Effectiveness and consequences of various recruitment methods in psychological research: case study; 2011; Póltorak, M.
- Using Amazon's Mechanical Turk for the recruitment of participants in Internet-based research; 2011; Reips, U. -D., Buffardi, L., Kuhlmann, T.
- 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.
- Social desirability and self-reported health risk behaviors in web-based research: three longitudinal...; 2011; Crutzen, R., Goeritz, A.
- Slider Scales Causing Serious Problems With Less Educated Respondents; 2011; Funke, F., Reips, U. -D., Thomas, R. K.
- Should we use the progress bar in online surveys? A meta-analysis of experiments manipulating progress...; 2011; Callegaro, M., Yang, Y., Villar, A.
- From "Web Questions" to "Propensity Score Weighting": An Evaluation of Topics and...; 2011; Welker, M., Taddicken, M.
- Survey Says? A Primer on Web-Based Survey Design and Distribution; 2011; Oppenheimer, A. J., Pannucci, C. J., Kasten, S. J., Haase, S. C.
- Quota Controls: Science or merely Sciencey?; 2011; Cape, P. J.
- Rich Profiles – Or: What's the problem with self-disclosure data?; 2011; Tress, F.
- Who are leaving our panel: panel attrition and personality traits; 2011; Marchand, M.
- 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.
- Determinants of access-panel participation: Recent experiences from the recruitment of members for a...; 2011; Engel, U., Bartsch, S., Vehre, H.
- 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.
- Respondent Characteristics as Explanations for Uninformative Survey Response: Sources of Nondifferentiation...; 2011; Van Meurs, L., Klausch, L. T., Schoenbach, K.
- Recreation Participation and Conservation Attitudes: Differences Between Mail and Online Respondents...; 2011; Graefe, A., Mowen, A. J., Covelli, E.
- Improving online surveys; 2011; Puleston, J.
- Snap judgement polling; 2011; Anderson, K., Wright, M., Wheeler, M.
- Individual differences in motivation to participate in online panels; 2011; Bruggen, E., Wetzels, M., de Ruyter, K., Schillewaert, N.
- Data Use: A systematic method for checking online questionnaires; 2011; Arbittier, J.
- In the market for an online panel? What clients need to know; 2011; Hartmann, S.
- How Procter & Gamble worked to develop online data quality guidelines; 2011; Gloeckler, D.
- Understanding the pros and cons of mixed-mode research; 2011; Mora, M.
- Visiting item non-responses in internet survey data collection; 2011; Albaum, G., Roster, C. A., Smith, S. M., Wiley, J. B.
- Estimating nonresponse bias and mode effects in a mixed-mode survey; 2011; Lugtig, P. J., Lensvelt-Mulders, G. J., Frerichs, R., Greven, A.
- Can search engine advertising help access rare samples?; 2011; Nunan, D., Knox, S.
- Why Web-assisted TDIs are a cost-effective qualitative methodology ; 2011; Donnelly, T.
- Capturing affective experiences using the SMS Experience Sampling (SMS-ES) method.; 2011; Andrews, L., Russell-Bennett, R., Drennan, J.
- Successful Prompting Methods on a Web-Based Survey; 2011; Venkataraman, L.
- Multi-Mode Survey Administration; 2011; Holder, T.
- Do’s and Don’ts of Developing Mixed Mode Surveys; 2011; Sanders, T.
- Mobile Survey Development Toolkit/Survey Framework; 2011; Rauch, M.
- Web based CATI on Amazon Elastic Compute Cloud and VirtualBox using queXS; 2011; Zammit, A.
- Survey Suite: Our "LOGIN & GO" Solution to Survey Research Needs; 2011; Lowden, M.
- Factors Influencing Response Rates in Mail Surveys and Reducing Costs; 2011; Schultz, M., Allen, T.
- A Dinosaur That Just Won't Die: A Return to Paper Surveys; 2011; Crandall, S., Crisafulli, T.
- Responses to Mail-Internet Mixed Mode Surveys: When Can we do Away with Paper Questionnaires?; 2011; Krebill-Prather, R.
- Web/Cloud Based CATI Using queXS; 2011; Zammit, A.
- When Referring to Mode, Is Expressed Preference the Same as Reality?; 2011; Denk, K.
- Developing Paradata Tools to Maximize Call Center Conversion Rates; 2011; Heinrich, T., Pittman, J., Abu, K.
- Incentives, Research-based Best Practices; 2011; Dykema, J.
- e-Collection at Statistics Canada; 2011; Faid, M.
- "But This is My Cell Phone!": A Qualitative Look at Practical Techniques for Gaining the...; 2011; George, J., Balok, T., Frasier, A. M.
- Developing and Implementing Adaptive Total Design (ATD); 2011; Carley-Baxter, L. R., Mitchell, S., Peytchev, A., Day, O.

