Web Survey Bibliography
Purpose – The electronic social media such as Twitter, Facebook, MySpace, etc. have become a major form of communication, and the expression of attitudes and opinions, for the general public. Recently, they have also become a source of data for market researchers. This paper aims to provide a critical look at the advantages and limitations of such an approach to understanding brand perceptions and attitudes in the market place. Although the social media provide a wealth of data for automated content analyses, this review questions the validity and reliability of this research approach, and concludes that social media monitoring (SMM) is a poor substitute for in-depth qualitative research which has many advantages and benefits.
Design/methodology/approach – The paper presents a detailed, systematic comparison of various research approaches. These include well-established methods and recent inventions which are in use to explore and understand consumer behaviour and attitudes. Particular attention is given to the analysis of spontaneous consumer attitudes as expressed through the social media and also in qualitative research interviews.
Findings – This analysis concludes that there are three critical features which differentiate qualitative research (as practised in IDIs and group discussions) from SMM. These are: the direct, interactive dialogue or conversation between consumers and researchers; the facility to “listen” and attend to the (sometimes unspoken) underlying narrative which connects consumers' needs and aspirations, personal goals and driving forces to behaviour and brand choice; and the dynamic, interactive characteristics of the interview that achieve a meeting of minds to produce a shared understanding. Philosophically, it is this “conversation” that gives qualitative research its validity and authenticity which makes it superior to SMM.
Originality/value – This review questions the validity and reliability of the SMM, and concludes that it is a poor substitute for in-depth qualitative research which has many advantages and benefits.
Journal Homepage (abstract) / (full text)
Web Survey Bibliography - Online qualitative research (759)
- Effects of Lotteries on Response Behavior in Online Panels; 2013; Goeritz, A., Luthe, S. C.
- The E-Interview in Qualitative Research; 2013; Bampton, R., Cowton, C., Downs, Y.
- Methodological Considerations of Qualitative Email Interviews; 2013; Nehls, K.
- Research Intentions are Nothing without Technology: Mixed-Method Web Surveys and the Coberen Wall of...; 2013; Ganassali, S., Rodriguez-Santos, C.
- Using Web Surveys for Psychology Experiments: A Case Study in New Media Technology for Research; 2013; Peden, B. F., Tiry , A. M.
- Virtual research assistants: Replacing human interviewers by automated avatars in virtual worlds; 2013; Hasler, B. S., Tuchman, P., Friedman, D.
- Compared to a small, supervised lab experiment, a large, unsupervised web-based experiment on a previously...; 2013; Ryan, R. S., Wilde, M., Crist, S.
- An approach to selecting online respondents; 2013; Terhanian, G.
- By the Numbers: Theory of adaptation or survival of the fittest?; 2013; Cavallaro, K.
- Using a web-based survey tool to undertake a Delphi study: Application for nurse education research; 2013; Gill, F. J., Leslie, G. D., Grech, C., Latour, J. M.
- Pros and cons of virtual interviewers – vote in the discussion about surveytainment; 2013; Póltorak, M., Kowalski, J.
- Does one really know?: Avoiding noninformative answers in a reliable way.; 2013; de Leeuw, E. D., Boevee, A., Hox, J.
- Sampling online communities: using triplets as basis for a (semi-) automated hyperlink web crawler.; 2013; Veny, Y.
- Prison break: Releasing offline experiments from methodological constraints by transforming them into...; 2013; Förstel, H., Manthei, K., Mohnen, A., Berger, G.
- GESIS Online Panel Pilot: Results from a Probability-Based Online Access Panel; 2013; Kaczmirek, L., Bandilla, W., Schaurer, I., Struminskaya, B., Weyandt, K.
- How the screen-out influence the dropout of a commercial panel; 2013; Bartoli, B.
- Innovation in Data Collection: the Responsive Design Approach; 2013; Bianchi, A., Biffignandi, S.
- Break-off and attrition in the GIP amongst technologically experienced and inexperienced participants...; 2013; Blom, A. G., Bossert, D., Clark, V., Funke, F., Gebhard, F., Holthausen, A., Krieger, U., Wachenfeld...
- Nonresponse and Nonresponse Bias in a Probability-Based Internet Panel; 2013; Blom, A. G., Bossert, D., Funke, F., Gebhard, F., Holthausen, A., Krieger, U.
- Rewards - Money for Nothing?; 2013; Cape, P. J., Martin, P.
- Effects of incentive reduction after a series of higher incentive waves in a probability-based online...; 2013; Struminskaya, B., Kaczmirek, L., Schaurer, I., Bandilla, W.
- Timing of Nonparticipation in an Online Panel: The effect of incentive strategies; 2013; Douhou, S., Scherpenzeel, A.
- Measurement effects in mixed-mode panel surveys; 2013; Lugtig, P. J.
- Life history calendars - a viable method for web-based data collection?; 2013; Glasner, T., van der Vaart, W.
- Experiences from a probability-based Internet panel: Sample, recruitment and participation; 2013; Scherpenzeel, A.
- Participation and engagement in web surveys of the general population: An overview of challenges and...; 2013; Roberts, C.
- Online Research, Game On!; 2013; Puleston, J.
- Use of a Social Networking Web Site for Recruiting Canadian Youth for Medical Research; 2013; Chu, J. L., Snider, C. E.
- 'Ready to complete the survey on Facebook': Web 2.0 as a research tool in business studies; 2013; Gregori, A., Baltar, F.
- Online Instruments, Data Collection, and Electronic Measurements: Organizational Advancements; 2013; Bocarnea, M. C., Reynolds, R. A., Baker, J. D.
- The equivalence of Internet versus paper-based surveys in IT/IS adoption research in collectivistic...; 2013; Fang, J., Wen, C., Prybutok, V.
- How Do Lotteries and Study Results Influence Response Behavior in Online Panels?; 2013; Goeritz, A., Luthe, S. C.
- 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.
- Especially for You: Motivating Respondents in an Internet Panel by Offering Tailored Questions; 2012; Oudejans, M.
- Social media as a data collection tool: the impact of Facebook in behavioural research; 2012; Zoppos, E.
- The war against unengaged online respondents; 2012; Gittelman, S. H., Trimarchi, E.
- Qualitatively Speaking: The five absolute, no-excuse must-dos for online qualitative researchers; 2012; Rossow, A.
- Can Microtargeting Improve Survey Sampling? An Assessment of Accuracy and Bias in Consumer File Marketing...; 2012; Pasek, J.
- Survey Interviewing: Deviations from the Script; 2012; Schaeffer, N. C.
- Specific mixed-mode methodology to reach sensory disabled people in quantitative surveys; 2012; Fontaine, S.
- 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.
- Dimensions of Online Survey Data Quality What really matters?; 2012; Puleston, J., Eggers, M.
- Measuring Work Activities and Skill Requirements of Occupations: Experiences from a European Pilot Study...; 2012; Tijdens, K., De Ruijter, E., De Ruijter, J.
- An assessment of equivalence between Internet and paper-based surveys: evidence from collectivistic...; 2012; Fang, J., Wen, C., Prybutok, V.
- Using screen video capture software to aide and inform cognitive interviewing; 2012; Chaney, B. H., Barry, A. E., Chaney, J. D., Stellefson, M. L., Webb, M. C.
- E-Mail Surveys; 2012; Mesch, G.
- Does survey experience affect respondents’ reported level of satisfaction?; 2012; Schultz Christensen, A., Ladenburg, J.
- Evaluation of an online (opt-in) panel for public participation geographic information systems surveys...; 2012; Brown, G., Weber, D., Zanon, D., de Bie, K.
