Web Survey Bibliography
Occupation is a key variable in socio-economic research and predominantly asked using an open response format, followed by field- or office-coding. Web-surveys are disadvantageous because unidentifiable and too aggregate responses can’t be corrected during survey completion. Two solutions can improve respondent’s self-identification, namely online recoding of text or a search tree with an occupational database. The latter is commonly used by online jobsites. Statistical agencies judge the measurement of occupation in web-surveys risky.
The paper uses the 2010q2 data for UK, Belgium and Netherlands (16,680 observations) from the continuous, multi-country WageIndicator web-survey on work and wages, employing a 3-tier search tree with a choice-set of approximately 1,600 occupational titles. This paper investigates:
• What are dropout rates during search tree completion?
• What is completion time for completed and not-completed search trees?
• How often do respondents use the open ended question following the search tree for further detailing their occupation?
• Are dropout rates during search tree completion explained by the length of search paths or individual characteristics?
• Does search tree completion time depends on characteristics related to the survey, the search tree, or individual education?
A new dataset was created, consisting of the survey data, the time stamps and data on the length of the search tree (words and characters). The findings show that drop-out rates for the search tree are approximately 10%, taken into account an overall drop-out rate of 50%. The base model reveals indeed that the more characters red, the higher the likelihood of drop-out, though the effect is larger and significant for the numbers of characters in the 1st compared to the 2nd tier. Drop-out chances in tier1 are lower for employees compared to employment status groups with slightly less pronounced occupations, such as unemployed, students or housewives. No significant relationship is found between the number of characters in tier1 and the time needed to complete tier1, but both the number of characters in tier2 and tier3 and the respective completion times relate positively. The text data was analysed separately, revealing that respondents tend to report a more disaggregated job title.
Conference Homepage(abstract) / (full text)
Web Survey Bibliography - Germany (416)
- Challenges of assessing the quality of a prerecruited probability-based panel of internet users in...; 2012; Struminskaya, B., Kaczmirek, L.
- Item comparability in cross-national surveys: results from asking probing questions in cross-national...; 2012; Behr, D., Braun, M., Kaczmirek, L., Bandilla, W.
- Assessing Cross-National Equivalence of Measures of Xenophobia: Evidence from Probing in Web Surveys; 2012; Behr, D., Braun, M., Kaczmirek, L.
- Mobile Befragungen: Was Big Data mit kleinen Geräten zu tun hat; 2012
- Item non-response in open-ended questions: Who does not answer on the meaning of left and right?; 2012; Scholz, E., Zuell, C.
- Innovation der Online-Datenerhebung für wissenschaftliche Forschungen. Das niederländische MESS-Projekt...; 2012; Das, M.
- Comparing Ranking Techniques in Web Surveys; 2012; Blasius, J.
- Design of CAWI Instruments for Social Surveys ; 2012; Blanke, K.
- Enhancing Web Surveys With New HTML5 Input Types; 2012; Funke, F.
- GESIS Online Access Panel Pilot Study: Recruitment and Panel Maintenance; 2012; Kaczmirek, L., Bandilla, W., Schaurer, I., Struminskaya, B., Weyandt, K.
- The German Internet Panel: First Results from the Recruitment Phases; 2012; Blom, A. G.
- Assessing the Magnitude of Non-Consent Biases in Linked Survey and Administrative Data; 2012; Sakshaug, J. W., Kreuter, F.
- Improving RDD Cell Phone Samples. Evaluation of Different Pre-call Validation Methods; 2012; Kunz, T., Fuchs, M.
- Marktforschung mit dem iPad-Panel von Axel Springer Media Impact; 2012
- Effects of Personalized Versus Generic Implementation of an Intra-Organizational Online Survey on Psychological...; 2012; Mueller, K., Straatmann, T., Hattrup, K., Jochum, M.
- Positioning of Clarification Features in Web Surveys: Evidence from Eye Tracking Data; 2012; Kunz, T., Fuchs, M.
- Using Adaptive Questionnaire Design in Open-ended Questions: A Fieldexperimental Study on the Size of...; 2012; Fuchs, M., Emde, M.
- Exploring New Pathways to Survey Recruitment; 2012; Bilgram, V., Stadler, D.Jawecki, G.
- Does Mode Matter? Initial Evidence from the German Longitudinal Election Study (GLES); 2012; Blumenstiel, J. E., Rossmann, J.
- Best of both worlds – The INSA study 50plus; 2012; Geissler, H., Blome, C.
- The “MediaLiveTracker” – A New Online-Tool for Real-Time-Response-Measurement; 2012; Kercher, J., Bachl, M., Voegele, C., Vohle, F.
- Surveytainment 2.0: Why investing 10 more minutes more in constructing your questionnaire is worth considering...; 2012; Muehle, A., Tress, F., Schmidt, S., Winkler, T.
- Market research online community (MROC) versus focus group; 2012; Zuber, M.
- Data quality in MAWI and CAWI; 2012; Mavletova, A. M., Blasius, J.
- Can mobile-web surveys substitute classic web-surveys? Results from an exploratory, comparative method...; 2012; Bohn, A., Doering, N., Maxl, E.
- Scrutinizing Dynamics – Rolling panel waves in theory and practice; 2012; Faas, T., Blumenberg, J. N.
- The German Internet Panel: Design of a Probability-Based Online Survey; 2012; Blom, A. G., Gathmann, C., Holthausen, A., Riepe, C.
- The price we have to pay: Incentive experiments in the recruitment process for a probability-based online...; 2012; Schaurer, I., Struminskaya, B., Kaczmirek, L., Bandilla, W.
- Effects of number of response options in web surveys: The role of verbal labels; 2012; Thorsdottir, F., Fuchs, M., Jonsdottir, J.
- Little experience with technology as a cause of nonresponse in online surveys; 2012; Struminskaya, B., Schaurer, I., Kaczmirek, L., Bandilla, W.
- Comparing Item-Non-Response and Open Questions within different Web Survey Types; 2012; Silber, H., Lischewski, J., Leibold, J.
- Continuous large-scale volunteer web-surveys: The experience of Lohnspiegel and WageIndicator; 2012; Oez, F.
- Is Pretesting Established Among Online Survey Tool Users?; 2012
- An Evaluation of Two Non-Reactive Web Questionnaire Pretesting Methods; 2012; Lenzner, T.
- High potential for mobile Web surveys: Findings from a survey representative for German Internet users...; 2012; Funke, F., Wachenfeld, A.
- Better low-tech than sorry: How technophile questionnaires may affect psychological representativeness...; 2012; Funke, F., Reips, U. -D.
- Can Social Media Research replace traditional research methods?; 2012; Faber, T., Einhorn, M., Hofmann, O., Loeffler, M.
- Bad Boy Matrix Question – Whatcha gonna do when they come for you?; 2012; Tress, F.
- Effects of Static versus Dynamic Formatting Instructions for Open-Ended Numerical Questions in Web Surveys...; 2012; Kunz, T., Fuchs, M.
- FamilyVote – Conducting online surveys with children and families; 2012; Geissler, H., Peeters, H.
- New Insights about market research with an iPad-panel; 2012; Manouchehri, A., Rieber, D., Moughrabi, C.
- Asking Probing Questions in Web Surveys: Which factors have an Impact on the Quality of Responses? ; 2012; Behr, D., Kaczmirek, L., Braun, M., Bandilla, W.
- Assessing the Quality of Survey Data ; 2012; Blasius, J.
- Exploring Animated Faces Scales in Web Surveys: Drawbacks and Prospects; 2012; Emde, M., Fuchs, M.
- Reminders in Web-Based Data Collection: Increasing Response at the Price of Retention?; 2012; Goeritz, A., Crutzen, R.
- 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.
- German Web-based Registry for Eating Disorders; 2011; Gross, G., Birgegård, A., Zipfel, S.
- E-dater, Artificial Actors, and German Households; 2011; Hebing, M.

