Web Survey Bibliography
Response categories may be used differently as a result of ethnic background or country of residence. When making comparisons between countries, there are a number of factors (e.g. mode, demographics, etc.) that must be equated before we can attribute differences due to culture and not other factors. Scale polarity is one issue that can cause some differences between countries – bipolar scales may sometimes be inappropriately rendered as unipolar scales (and vice versa) in translations. In this study, we compared scale variants (e.g. unipolar versus bipolar) and extent of semantic anchoring (fully anchored versus end anchored scales) in leading to differences between countries. This experiment had 36,938 respondents from 6 different European countries complete a web-based survey on attitudes and behaviors toward different activities. Respondents were randomly assigned to 1 of 4 scale conditions to rate in terms of their liking for the activity (fully versus end anchored crossed with unipolar versus bipolar). They were first asked how many days they did a series of actions and then evaluated their attitudes toward the actions (e.g. drinking coffee, attending religious services, etc.). We found significant differences in endorsement proportions for the response categories as a function of scale type. The fully anchored unipolar scale showed a lower endorsement of the highest response categories across countries. There were mean differences in the evaluations of the issues as a function of country. However, controlling for familiarity with the topic and demographic factors, we found that these differences between countries was eliminated or reduced for most of the activities we examined. We found significant differences in response style proportions (extreme versus middling response styles) as a result of country of residence. However, response style differences between countries were more likely to occur for the end-anchored scales and not for the fully anchored scales.
Conference Homepage (abstract)
Web Survey Bibliography (6359)
- Benchmarking for better surveys; 2012; Nallan, S.
- An experimental investigation of the effects of noncontingent and contingent incentives in recruiting...; 2012; Lavrakas, P. J., Dennis, J. M., Peugh, J., Shand-Lubbers, J., Lee, E., Peugh, J., Charlebois, O., Murakami...
- Adult gadget ownership over time (2006-2012); 2012
- Subjective Well-being Of Spanish Workers: Continuous Voluntary Web Survey Examination; 2012; de Pedraza, P., Guzi, M.
- 28 Questions to Help Buyers of Online Samples; 2012
- 2010 ACS Content Test Evaluation Report Covering Computer and Internet ; 2012; Shin, H. B.
- Specific mixed-mode methodology to reach sensory disabled people in quantitative surveys; 2012; Fontaine, S.
- Response Mode Choice and the Hard-to-Interview in the American Community Survey; 2012; Nichols, E. M., Horwitz, R., Guarino Tancreto, J.
- Recruiting in an Internet panel using respondent driven sampling; 2012; Schonlau, M.
- A Choice in Mode: A Solution for Increasing Response Rates of Hard-to-Survey Populations?; 2012; Haan, M., Ongena, Y. P.
- The Feasibility of Conducting a Web Survey Using Respondent Driven Sampling among Transgenders in the...; 2012; Kappelhof, J.
- The role of topic interest and topic salience in online panel web surveys.; 2012; Keusch, F.
- Multi-Language Multi-Continent B2B Community Panel: How B2B research can effectively span the world; 2012; Morden, M., Accomando, E.
- Can Survey Gaming Techniques Cross Continents? Examining cross cultural reactions to creative questioning...; 2012; Puleston, J.
- Facing The Future Webcams as a survey tool in China; 2012; Gordon, A., Llewellyn, T., Gu, E.
- Device Diversity: Understanding the complexity of varied devices for taking surveys – Case study...; 2012; Pearson, C., Backlund, K., Veling, L., Tsvelik, M., Jehoel, S.
- Research Goes Mobile: Findings from initial smartphone application research; 2012; Dubreuil, C., Joubert, S.
- Research in the Mobile Mindset: Exploring the unexplored in the mobile research space; 2012; Willems, A., Veris, E., Verhaeghe, A.
- Better Answers to Basic Questions: Enhancing the accuracy of online reach and audience metrics; 2012; van Dam, P. H., van Ossenbruggen, R., Voorend, R.
- Rules of engagement: The war against poorly engaged respondents - guidelines for elimination; 2012; Gittelman, S. H., Trimarchi, E.
- Reality check in the digital age: The relationship between what we ask and what people actually do; 2012; Hofmeyr, J., Louw, A.
- Website Versus Traditional Survey Comments: Do they tell the same story?; 2012; Brandt, R., House, M.
- Dimensions of Online Survey Data Quality What really matters?; 2012; Puleston, J., Eggers, M.
- WEBDATANET: web-based data-collection methodological challenges, solutions and implementations. Action...; 2012; de Pedraza, P.
- WebSM Study: Survey software features overview ; 2012; Vehovar, V.; Cehovin, G.; Kavcic, L.; Lenar, J.
- Web Panels; 2012; Bethlehem, J., Biffignandi, S.
- Use of Response Propensities; 2012; Bethlehem, J., Biffignandi, S.
- Weighting Adjustment Techniques; 2012; Bethlehem, J., Biffignandi, S.
- The Problem of Self-Selection; 2012; Bethlehem, J.,Biffignandi, S.
- The Problem of Undercoverage; 2012; Bethlehem, J., Biffignandi, S.
- Mixed-Mode Surveys; 2012; Bethlehem, J., Biffignandi, S.
- Designing a Web Survey Questionnaire; 2012; Bethlehem, J., Biffignandi, S.
- Examining Contexts-of-Use for Web-Based and Paper-Based Questionnaires; 2012; Hardré, P. L., Crowson, H. M., Xie, K.
- Probabilistic survey questions and incorrect answers: Retirement income replacement rates; 2012; van Santen, P., Alessie, R., Kalwij, A.
- Survey Quality; 2012; Lyberg, L. E.
- Combining Mail and E-Mail Contacts to Facilitate Participation in Mixed-Mode Surveys; 2012; Israel, G. D.
- Effects of E-Mailed Versus Mailed Invitations and Incentives on Response Rates, Data Quality, and Costs...; 2012; Dykema, J., Stevenson, J., Klein, L., Kim, Y., Day, B.
- Prenotification, Incentives, and Survey Modality: An Experimental Test of Methods to Increase Survey...; 2012; Tepper, J. R., Jacob, B.
- Measuring Work Activities and Skill Requirements of Occupations: Experiences from a European Pilot Study...; 2012; Tijdens, K., De Ruijter, E., De Ruijter, J.
- Using Free Online Survey Software in Your Teaching; 2012; Chippindall, J.
- Reaching and Hearing the Invisible: Organizational Research on Invisible Stigmatized Groups via Web...; 2012; Trau, R. N. C., Haertel, C. E. J., Haertel, G. F.
- Comparability of Survey Measurements; 2012; Oberski, D.
- Why People Agree to Participate in Surveys; 2012; Albaum, G., Smith, S. M.
- Unit Non-Response Due to Refusal; 2012; Stoop, I.
- Classification of Surveys; 2012; Stoop, I., Harrison, E.
- What Survey Modes are Most Effective in Eliciting Self-Reports of Criminal or Delinquent Behavior?; 2012; Kleck, G., Roberts, K.
- Non-Response and Measurement Error; 2012; Billiet, J., Matsuo, H.
- An Overlooked Approach in Survey Research: Total Survey Error; 2012; Bautista, R.
- An assessment of equivalence between Internet and paper-based surveys: evidence from collectivistic...; 2012; Fang, J., Wen, C., Prybutok, V.
- Effects of Incentives in Surveys; 2012; Toepoel, V.

