Web Survey Bibliography
Relevance & Research Question:
Most often, psychological studies participants are recruited with help of some selected organisations (universities, hospitals etc.). Usually they are invited to the study in direct face to face contact. Online research and recruitment are rare, partly due to the questioned validity caused be perceived too big anonymity.
Direct personal recruitment enables easy verification of participants identity and tend to better engage them. Yet, due to time and money limitations, it is often restricted only to few sources of participants that lead to too high level of sample homogeneity. Moreover, the results may be affected by perceived researcher's expectations and/or social desirability effects.
For my doctoral study I decided on wider range of recruitment methods. The important questions to be addressed for the use of this and future studies were about the usefulness and validity of this approach, i.e.: (1) effectiveness in terms of gathering possibly numerous and diversified sample, (2) reliability and similarity of results for various sub-samples.
Methods & Data: The respondents were couples expecting their first babies. They were filling in a profiling survey and psychological questionnaires (concerning their personal and relationship traits) online. They were recruited directly offline (at courses for pregnant couples and at trade fair with articles for babies) and indirectly online (mainly with the use of Market Research Access Panels, announcements on online forums and by on-site pop-up invitations). All together a few thousand people became invited.
Results: (1) Direct personal invitations were more effective in terms that they let more precisely reach the target group and they resulted in lower drop-out. However, due to the easily achieved scale effect, still indirect online recruitment provided the majority of the final sample. It also very much helped to obtain its higher diversity. (2) The data collected thanks to direct vs intermediated invitations did not differ significantly neither in terms of reliability nor in terms of average levels of the variables measured.
Added Value: Conclusions from the analysis may help to resolve the mistrust toward Internet research and encourage to use wider range of contact channels with participants in psychological studies.
Conference Homepage (abstract) / (presentation)
Web Survey Bibliography (6390)
- The equivalence of Internet versus paper-based surveys in IT/IS adoption research in collectivistic...; 2013; Fang, J., Wen, C., Prybutok, V.
- Examining the Gender Effects of Different Incentive Amounts in a Web Survey; 2013; Boulianne, S. J.
- Online Survey Software; 2013; Baker, J. D.
- How Do Lotteries and Study Results Influence Response Behavior in Online Panels?; 2013; Goeritz, A., Luthe, S. C.
- Mode Effects in Free-list Elicitation: Comparing Oral, Written, and Web-based Data Collection; 2013; Gravlee, C. C., Bernard, H. R., R., Jacobsohn, A., R.Maxwell, C. R.
- Incentives for college student participation in web-based substance use surveys; 2013; Patrick, M. E., Singer, E., Boyd, C. J., Cranford, J. A., McCabe, S. E.
- The effect of short formative diagnostic web quizzes with minimal feedback; 2013; Baelter, O., Enstroem, E., Klingenberg, B.
- Increasing Web Survey Response Rates in Innovation Research: An Experimental Study of Static and Dynamic...; 2013; Sauermann, H.; Roach, M.
- Sample composition discrepancies in different stages of a probability-based online panel; 2013; Bosnjak, M., Haas, I., Galesic, M., Kaczmirek, L., Bandilla, W., Couper, M. P.
- Survey of Cloud Computing; 2013; Furht, B.
- A comparison of data quality and practicality of online versus postal questionnaires in a sample of...; 2013; King, M. T., Butow, P., Olver, I., Smith, A. B.
- Up Means Good: The Impact of Screen Position on Evaluative Ratings in Web Surveys.; 2013; Tourangeau, R., Conrad, F. G., Couper, M. P.
- WebSM Study: Overview of Features of Software Packages: SurveyMonkey, QuestionPro, FluidSurveys, Wufoo...; 2012; Cehovin, G.; Vehovar, V.
- WebSM Study: Speed and efficiency of online survey tools; 2012; Cehovin, G.; Vehovar, V.
- Worldwide online research spending; 2012
- What we can learn from unintentional mobile respondents; 2012; Peterson, G.
- Using paradata to explore item-level response times in surveys; 2012; Couper, M. P., Kreuter, F.
- Using multivariate statistics, 6th Edition; 2012; Tabachnick, B. G., Fidell, L. S.
- Unintentional mobile respondents; 2012; Peterson, G.
- Tracking preference expression (DNT); 2012
- The smartphone psychology manifesto; 2012; Miller, G.
- The rise of the "connected viewer"; 2012; Smith, A., Boyles, J. L.
- The practice of social research; 2012; Babbie, E. R.
- The integration of facebook into class management: an exploratory study; 2012; Chou, P. N.
- The effects of item saliency and question design on measurement error in a self-administered survey; 2012; Stern, M. J., Smyth, J. D., Mendez, J.
- The cross platform report. Q2 -2012 - US; 2012
- Speed (necessarily) doesn’t kill: A new way to detect survey satisficing; 2012; Garland, P. et al.
- Smartphone ownership update: September 2012; 2012; Rainie, L.
- Sensitive topics in PC Web and mobile web surveys: Is there a difference?; 2012; Mavletova, A. M., Couper, M. P.
- Selection bias of internet panel surveys: A comparison with a paper-based survey and national governmental...; 2012; Tsuboi, S. et al.
- Screenwise panel: Frequently Asked Questions; 2012
- Research company spotlight - Mobile surveys; 2012
- Redeveloping the research section of Meningitis UK's website — A case study report; 2012; Witt, J. et al.
- Quality in market research. From theory to practice. 2nd Edition; 2012; Harding, D., Jackson, P.
- Participation of mobile users in traditional online studies; 2012; Jue, A.
- Online survey statistics for the mobile future. Updated with Q3 2012 data; 2012
- Ofcom technology tracker Wave 3; 2012
- Ofcom technology tracker Wave 2; 2012
- Not just playing around; 2012; Ewing, T.
- Norme di qualita' Assirm (Assirm quality rules]; 2012
- NBCU enlists Google, ComScore to track multiscreen Olympics viewing; 2012; Spangler, T.
- MRS Guidelines for online reseach; 2012
- More dirty little secrets of online panel research.; 2012
- Mobile usability; 2012; Nielsen, J., Budiu, R.
- Mobile email opens report 2nd half 2011; 2012
- Metering mobile usage. Insights from global Arbitron mobile trends panel; 2012; Verkasalo, H.
- Media tracker; 2012
- Measuring the quality of governmental websites in a controlled versus an online setting with the ‘...; 2012; Elling, S. et al.
- Measuring modern media consumption; 2012; Arini, N.
- ISO 20252. Market, opinion and social research-Vocabulary and service requirements, 2nd Edition; 2012