Web Survey Bibliography
Relevance & Research Question: Survey researchers have been forced—by time and budget constraints—to rely on a slew of sampling methods to estimate population parameters. To be valid, sampling procedures must a) have nearly 100% population coverage b) ensure equal chance of selection, and c) feature reasonable response rates. Convenience samples have long been considered inadequate for serious research but collecting opinions from probability samples now takes longer than conveniently interviewing millions of people.
Increasingly, RDD telephone sampling now features response rates below 20%. Moreover, the decrease in landline telephony and the corresponding rise in mobile have put pressure on the claim of near total coverage. Though all online interviewing relies on convenience sampling, it is arguable that people only answer their phones to take surveys (that are a part of RDD studies) when it is convenient for them—a group that continues to shrink.
Methods & Data: This paper investigates whether volume-based approaches to collecting opinions are reasonable substitutes for probability sampling. To do so, we exposed Gallup’s long-used, well documented, United States Presidential approval rating question to a random subset of people who recently completed a survey for one of SurveyMonkey’s seven million survey creators. We presented the question to roughly 10,000 survey takers per day from June 10, 2010 to July 29, 2010. In total, 87, 308 people answered the question.
Results: The results track Gallup’s daily approval numbers within the reported margin of error nearly each day that the test ran without mimicking Gallup’s use of statistical weighting. A closer look reveals that coverage and response rate were respectable relative to those of probability studies. Specifically, respondents were from 8,300 of 19,000 American cities (43%) which approaches the proportion of U.S. households with a landline telephone (60%). Moreover, the respondents yielded an average daily response rate of 46%--more than double that of a typical telephone survey.
Added Value: These findings shed light on recent interest by market researchers in gathering data from technology and social networking sources that have access to extremely large and diverse pools of people and can ask questions of them for virtually no cost.
Conference Homepage (abstract) / (presentation)
Web survey bibliography - 2011 (358)
- Surveying the General Public over the Internet Using Address-Based Sampling and Mail Contact Procedures...; 2011; Messer, B. L., Dillman, D. A.
- Mobile phones as an extension of the participant observer's self: Reflections on the emergent role...; 2011; Hein, W., O'Donohoe, S., Ryan, A.
- Mixed methods designs in marketing research; 2011; Harrison, R. L., Reilly, T. M.
- Introduction to Usability Testing for Survey Research; 2011; Geisen, E., Jarrett, C.
- Utilizing Web Technology in Business Data Collection: Some Norwegian, Dutch and Danish Experiences; 2011; Haraldsen, G., Snijkers, G., Roos, M., Sundvoll, A., Vik, T., Stax, H.-P.
- E-Census 2011 Portugal: implementation and results of the Pilot Survey; 2011; Vicente, P., Rosa, A., Reis, E.
- Facebook sampling methods: some methodological proposals; 2011; Macrì, E., Tessitore, C.
- Reflections on web based data collection in a mixed mode design: the case of the EU Labour Force Survey...; 2011; Kloek, W., van der Valk, J.
- Standardising the web data collection channel at the Basque Statistics Office (EUSTAT); 2011; Prado, C., Guinea , C.
- An Experimental Investigation of Mode Effects in the Hungarian Census Test 2009; 2011; Vereczkei, Z.
- Collaborative systems for enhancing the analysis of social surveys: the Grid Enabled Specialist Data...; 2011; Lambert, P., Warner, G., Doherty, T., McCafferty, S., Watt, J., Comerford, M., Gayle, V., Tan, L., Blum...
- ILS Online Survey; 2011; Weber, C.
- Development of a Web-Based Survey for Monitoring Daily Health and its Application in an Epidemiological...; 2011; Sugiura, H., Ohkusa, Y., Akahane, M., Sano, T., Okabe, N., Imamura, T.
- Sampling v. Scale: An investigation the tension between convenience sampling, response rates, probability...; 2011; Garland, P.
- Effectiveness and consequences of various recruitment methods in psychological research: case study; 2011; Poltorak, M.
- A new approach to the analysis of survey drop-out. Results from Follow-up Surveys in the German Longitudinal...; 2011; Rossmann, J., Blumenstiel, J. E., Steinbrecher, M.
- Tracking the decision-making process – Findings from an Online Rolling Cross-Section Panel Study...; 2011; Faas, T.
- Should we use the progress bar in online surveys? A meta-analysis of experiments manipulating progress...; 2011; Callegaro, M., Yang, Y., Villar, A.
- From "Web Questions" to "Propensity Score Weighting": An Evaluation of Topics and...; 2011; Welker, M., Taddicken, M.
- Rich Profiles – Or: What's the problem with self-disclosure data?; 2011; Tress, F.
- Who are leaving our panel: panel attrition and personality traits; 2011; Marchand, M.
- Mobile Research Apps – Adding New Capabilities to Market Research; 2011; Rieber, D.
- The influence of personality traits and motives for joining on participation behavior in online panels...; 2011; Keusch, F.
- Asking sensitive questions in a recruitment interview for an online panel: the income question; 2011; Schaurer, I., Struminskaya, B., Kaczmirek, L., Bandilla, W.
- Speeders in Online Value Research: Cross-checking results of fast and slow respondents in two separate...; 2011; Beckers, T., Siegers, P., Kuntz, A.
- Effects of survey question clarity on data quality; 2011; Lenzner, T.
- Respondent Characteristics as Explanations for Uninformative Survey Response: Sources of Nondifferentiation...; 2011; Van Meurs, L., Klausch, L. T., Schoenbach, K.
- Snap judgement polling; 2011; Anderson, K., Wright, M., Wheeler, M.
- Individual differences in motivation to participate in online panels; 2011; Bruggen, E., Wetzels, M., de Ruyter, K., Schillewaert, N.
- Data Use: A systematic method for checking online questionnaires; 2011; Arbittier, J.
- Understanding the pros and cons of mixed-mode research; 2011; Mora, M.
- Visiting item non-responses in internet survey data collection; 2011; Albaum, G., Roster, C. A., Smith, S. M., Wiley, J. B.
- Why Web-assisted TDIs are a cost-effective qualitative methodology ; 2011; Donnelly, T.
- Capturing affective experiences using the SMS Experience Sampling (SMS-ES) method.; 2011; Andrews, L., Russell-Bennett, R., Drennan, J.
- Successful Prompting Methods on a Web-Based Survey; 2011; Venkataraman, L.
- Multi-Mode Survey Administration; 2011; Holder, T.
- Do’s and Don’ts of Developing Mixed Mode Surveys; 2011; Sanders, Ti.
- Mobile Survey Development Toolkit/Survey Framework; 2011; Rauch, M.
- Web based CATI on Amazon Elastic Compute Cloud and VirtualBox using queXS; 2011; Zammit, A.
- Survey Suite: Our "LOGIN & GO" Solution to Survey Research Needs; 2011; Lowden, M.
- A Dinosaur That Just Won't Die: A Return to Paper Surveys; 2011; Crandall, S., Crisafulli, T.
- Responses to Mail-Internet Mixed Mode Surveys: When Can we do Away with Paper Questionnaires?; 2011; Krebill-Prather, R.
- Web/Cloud Based CATI Using queXS; 2011; Zammit, A.
- When Referring to Mode, Is Expressed Preference the Same as Reality?; 2011; Denk, K.
- Developing Paradata Tools to Maximize Call Center Conversion Rates; 2011; Heinrich, T., Pittman, J., Abu, K.
- Incentives, Research-based Best Practices; 2011; Dykema, J.
- "But This is My Cell Phone!": A Qualitative Look at Practical Techniques for Gaining the...; 2011; George, J., Balok, T., Frasier, A. M.
- Developing and Implementing Adaptive Total Design (ATD); 2011; Carley-Baxter, L. R., Mitchell, S., Peytchev, A., Day, O.
- Three Era's of Survey Research; 2011; Groves, R. M.
- Creating Effective Designs for Mixed-Mode Surveys; 2011; Dillman, D. A.