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 - European survey research associaton conference 2011, ESRA, Lausanne (84)
- Proposed Indicators to Assess Interviewer Performance (IP) in CATI Surveys; 2011; Laflamme, F.
- 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.
- 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.
- 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.
- Separating selection from mode effects when switching from single (CATI) to mixed mode design (CATI /...; 2011; Carstensen, J., Kriwy, P., Krug, G., Lange, C.
- Testing between-mode measurement invariance under controlled selectivity conditions; 2011; Klausch, L. T.
- Evaluating Relative Mode Effects in Mixed-Mode Surveys: Three methods to disentangle selection and measurement...; 2011; Vannieuwenhuyze, J., Loosveldt, G.
- Using propensity score matching to separate mode- and selection effects; 2011; Lugtig, P. J., Lensvelt-Mulders, G. J.
- How to ask about fixed/mobile telephone usage? Impact of question wording and analysis of corresponding...; 2011; Slavec, A., Vehovar, V.
- A mixed mode pilot on consumer barometer; 2011; Taskinen, P., Simpanen, M.
- Separation of selection bias and mode effect in mixed-mode survey – Application to the face-to...; 2011; Bayart, C., Bonnel, P.
- Optimization of dual frame telephone survey designs; 2011; Slavec, A., Vehovar, V.
- A Comparison of CAPI and PAPI through a Randomized Field Experiment; 2011; De Weerdt, J.
- Flexibility of Web Surveys: Probing 'do-not-know' over the Phone and on the Web; 2011; Hox, J., de Leeuw, E. D.
- Is a Mixed-Mode Approach to Reduce Attrition in a Longitudinal Mental Health Study (NESDA) a Good Idea...; 2011; Hoogendoorn, A., Lamers, F., Hoekstra, C., Penninx, B., Smit, J. H.
- Changing research methods in Ukraine: CATI or Mixed-Mode Surveys?; 2011; Paniotto, V., Kharchenko, N.
- The effects of mixed mode designs on simple and complex analyses; 2011; Martin, P., Lynn, P.
- Mixed-mode surveys among non-western minorities in the Netherlands: does it work?; 2011; Kappelhof, J.
- Using Address-Based Sampling and Mail Contact Methods to Obtain Web Responses from the General Public...; 2011; Dillman, D. A., Messer, B. L.
- Social Climate Survey of Tobacco Control: A mixed-mode approach; 2011; Klein, J. D., McMillen, R.
- Multiple modes in cross-national surveys – a good mix?; 2011; Fitzgerald, R., Martin, P.
