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)
- Three Era's of Survey Research; 2011; Groves, R. M.
- Creating Effective Designs for Mixed-Mode Surveys; 2011; Dillman, D. A.
- Designing Surveys for Mobile Devices: Pocket-sized surveys that yield powerful results; 2011; Callegaro, M., Macer, T.
- Research on Internet survey errors and control methods; 2011; Mingyue, F., Xicang, Z.
- 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.
- Partnership-Driven Resources to Improve and Enhance Research (PRIMER): A Survey of Community-Engaged...; 2011; Dolor, R. J., Greene, S. M., Thompson, E., Baldwin, L.-M., Neale, A. V.
- Question Comprehensibility and Satisficing Behavior in Web Surveys; 2011; Lenzner, T.
- Examination of a ’Web Mode Effect’. An Experimental Comparison of Web and Paper Based Surveys...; 2011; Shamshiri-Petersen, D., Clement, S. L.
- Conceptualizing Trust in Digital Environments: Health-e Skepticism: Trust in the Age of the Internet; 2011; Harris, A., Wyatt, S., Kelly, S.
- The Changing Face of Trust in Health Websites; 2011; Sillence, L., Mo, P., Briggs, P., Harris, P. R.
- Some Researchers Do, Some Researchers Don’t: Reflections on Interdisciplinarity and Digital Social...; 2011; Pangbourne, K., Philip, L., Pignotti, E., Edwards, P.
- Internet & Learning: A Decade of Transformation in Learning Practices; 2011; Haythornthwaite, C., Andrews, R., Jones, C., de Castell, S., Goodfellow, R., Jewitt, C., Barton, D.
- Social Science Research Methods in Internet Time; 2011; Karpf, D. A.
- Quantifying Open-Ended Responses: Results from an Online Advertising Tracking Survey; 2011; Jacobe, A., Brewer, L., Vakalia, F., Turner, S., Marsh, S. M.
- Quality of responses to an open-ended question on a mixed-mode survey; 2011; Gibson, J., Vakalia, F., Turner, S.
- Open-ended questions in the context of temporary work research; 2011; Siponen, K.
- How do Respondents Perceive a Questionnaire? The Contribution of Open-ended Questions; 2011; Markou, E., Garnier, B.
- The Uses of Open-Ended Questions in Quantitative Surveys; 2011; Singer, E., Couper, M. P.
- A Mixed-Methods Approach to the Analysis of Open-Ended Comments; 2011; Robins, C. S., Lee, K., Perry, S., Berkowitz, S. G., Hintze, W.
- Statistical methods for reducing bias in web surveys; 2011; Lee, M. H.
- Implementation, implementation, implementation: old and new options for putting surveys and experiments...; 2011; MacKerron, G.
- The Structural Changes of Social Support Networks in a Decade of the Internet Uptake in Slovenia; 2011; Vehovar, V., Petric, G., Petrovèiè, A.
- Weaving the Web into Personal Communication Networks: A Mobile Phone Based Study of Smartphone Users; 2011; Kobayashi, T., Boase, J.
- Agree-Disagree Response Format versus Importance Judgment; 2011; Krebs, D.
- Testing a single mode vs a mixed mode design; 2011; Laaksonen, S.
- Germans' segregation preferences and immigrant group size: A factorial survey approach; 2011; Schlueter, E., Ullrich, J., Schmidt, P.
- Errors within web-based surveys: a comparison between two different tools for the analysis of tourist...; 2011; Polizzi, G., Oliveri, A. M.
- Current state of social media use for survey research; 2011; Hill, C. A., Dean, E.
- 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.,
- The Use of Structured Survey Instrument Metadata throughout the Data Lifecycle; 2011; Hansen, S. E.
- DDI and the Lifecycle of Longitudinal Surveys; 2011; Hoyle, L., Wackerow, J.
- Dissemination of survey (meta)data in the LISS data archive; 2011; Streefkerk, M., Elshout, S.
- Introduction to behavioral research methods (6th ed.); 2011; Leary, M. R.
- Underreporting in Interleafed Questionnaires: Evidence from Two Web Surveys; 2011; Medway, R., Viera Jr., L., Turner, S., Marsh, S. M.
- The use of cognitive interviewing methods to evaluate mode effects in survey questions; 2011; Gray, M., Blake, M., Campanelli, P., Hope, S.
- Supporting the Translation Process Online in a Cross-National Survey; 2011; Amin, A., Blom, A. G., Martens, M.
- Does the direction of Likert-type scales influence response behavior in web surveys?; 2011; Keusch, F.
- Cross-country Comparisons: Effects of Scale Type and Response Style Differences; 2011; Thomas, R. K.
- Explaining more variance with visual analogue scales: A Web experiment; 2011; Funke, F.
- A Comparison of Branching Response Formats with Single Response Formats; 2011; Thomas, R. K.
- Different functioning of rating scale formats – results from psychometric and physiological experiments...; 2011; Koller, M., Salzberger, T.
- 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.
- Cognitive interviewing in web surveys: the use of probing questions in cross-national web surveys; 2011; Behr, D., Braun, M., Kaczmirek, L., Bandilla, W.
- The impact of monetary incentives on completion and data quality in online surveys; 2011; van Veen, F., Goeritz, A., Sattler, S.
- Is it a good idea to optimise question format for mode of data collection? Results from a mixed modes...; 2011; Nicolaas, G., Campanelli, P., Hope, S., Jaeckle, A., Lynn, P., Nandi, A.
- The role of the interviewer in producing mode effects: results from a mixed modes experiment; 2011; Hope, S., Campanelli, P., Nicolaas, G., Lynn, P., Jaeckle, A., Nandi, A.
- The role of visual and aural stimuli in producing mode effects on answers to survey questions; 2011; Lynn, P., Hope, S., Campanelli, P., Nandi, A., Nicolaas, G., Jaeckle, A.
- Causes of Mode Effects on Survey Measurement ; 2011; Lynn, P., Campanelli, P., Nicolaas, G., Hope, S., Nandi, A., Jaeckle, A.

