Web Survey Bibliography
An up to date problem in household and individual surveys is the nonparticipation of units which may lead to significant nonresponse biases. One approach to overcome the nonparticipation in these surveys is the use of access panels. Though leading to expected higher response rates, the self-selection process at the recruitment stage urges the needs of a correction of the estimates in access panels. This can be done directly either by calibrating the estimates to the population of interest or by additionally using response propensity scores. The German Microcensus serves as recruitment pool for the access panel of German Official Statistics that is called Dauerstichprobe (DSP) with its voluntary nature of participation. The generation of a sample from the DSP must be treated as a consequence of multiple sampling stages with different inclusion probabilities at each stage. Therefore the whole selection process has to be taken into account when computing estimates based on surveys drawn from the DSP, e.g. the German Subsample of the European Union Statistics of Income and Living Conditions (EU-SILC). Considering estimates for change in time adds further complexity, especially when being interested in poverty estimates. The paper is built on earlier findings of ENDERLE, MÜNNICH AND BRUCH (2011) and AMAROV AND RENDTEL (2011). It has the aim to compute weights of all selection stages and examine their influence on measures of level and change over time. The performance of the weighting is measured in a close-to-reality simulation study. The generation of the survey samples is done by the application of a three stage selection experiment. That is, each replication of the simulation is a complete randomization of the sampling stages Microcensus (MC), access panel (DSP) and survey of interest (e.g. D-SILC) when drawing from the sampling frame (i.e. synthetic data of the German population).
Conference Homepage (abstract)
Web Survey Bibliography (6389)
- On the Use of Latent Variable Models to Detect Differences in the Interpretation of Vague Quantifiers...; 2013; Griffin, J.
- Managing mobile research: How it's different and why it matters; 2013; Kachhi-Jiwani, D., Tucker, J., Wilding-Brown, L.
- An approach to selecting online respondents; 2013; Terhanian, G.
- By the Numbers: Theory of adaptation or survival of the fittest?; 2013; Cavallaro, K.
- Designing and conducting business surveys; 2013; Snijkers, G.,Araldsen, G., , Willimack, D. K.Jones, J.
- Battle of the Scales: Understanding Respondent Scale Usage in the US and Abroad; 2013; Courtright, M., Pashupati, K., Pettit, F. A.
- Modular Survey Design: A Bite Size Proposal; 2013; Kelly, F., Stevens, S., Johnson, A.
- Cyborgs vs. Monsters: Assembling Modular Surveys to Create Complete Datasets; 2013; Johnson, E. P., Siluk, L., Tarraf, S.
- Do I Have Your Full Attention?; 2013; Cape, P. J.
- Does Sample Size Still Matter?; 2013; Bakken, D. G., Bond, M.
- Optimizing Surveys for Smartphones: Maximizing Response Rates While Minimizing Bias; 2013; Lattery, K., Park Bartolone, G., Saunders, T.
- Shorter Isn't Always Better; 2013; Burdein, I.
- Solving the Unintentional Mobile Challenge; 2013; Peterson, G., Mechling, J., LaFrance, J., Ham, G.
- Mobile Research Risk: What Happens to Data Quality When Respondents Use a Mobile Device for a Survey...; 2013; Baker-Prewitt, J.
- Internet-Based Recruitment to a Depression Prevention Intervention: Lessons From the Mood Memos Study...; 2013; Morgan, A. J., Jorm, A. F., Mackinnon, A. J.
- Challenges for Researchers Investigating Contraceptive Use and Pregnancy Intentions of Young Women Living...; 2013; Herbert, D. L., Loxton, D., Bateson, D., Weisberg, E., Lucke, J. C.
- Computer science security research and human subjects: Emerging considerations for research ethics boards...; 2013; Buchanan, E. A., Aycock, J., Dexter, S., Dittrich, D., Hvizdak, E. E.
- A standard for test reliability in group research; 2013; Ellis, J. L.
- 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.
- The comparison of road safety survey answers between web-panel and face-to-face; Dutch results of SARTRE...; 2013; Goldenbeld, C., de Craen, S.
- Addressing Survey Nonresponse Issues: Implications for ATE Principal Investigators, Evaluators, and...; 2013; Welch, W. W., Barlau, A. N.
- Pros and cons of virtual interviewers – vote in the discussion about surveytainment; 2013; Póltorak, M., Kowalski, J.
- Addressing Disclosure Concerns and Analysis Demands in a Real-Time Online Analytic System; 2013; Krenzke, T., Gentleman, J. F., Li, J., Moriarity, C.
- The General Survey System Initiative at RTI International: An Integrated System for the Collection and...; 2013; Thalji, L., Mitchell, S., Hill, C. A., Suresh, R., Speizer, H., Pratt, D.
- Consolidation and Standardization of Survey Operations at a Decentralized Federal Statistical Agency; 2013; Nealon, J., Gleaton, E.
- Examination of the equivalence of self-report survey-based paper-and-pencil and internet data collection...; 2013; Weigold, A., Weigold, I. K., Russell, E. J.
- An Assessment of Incentive Versus Survey Length Trade-offs in a Web Survey of Radiologists; 2013; Ziegenfuss, J. Y., Niederhauser, B. D., Kallmes, D., Beebe, T. J.
- Clarifying Categorical Concepts in a Web Survey.; 2013; Redline, C. D.
- Using Online and Paper Surveys - The Effectiveness of Mixed-Mode Methodology for Populations Over 50; 2013; De Bernardo, D. H., Curtis, A.
- The fish model: What factors affect participants while filling in an online questionnaire?; 2013; Mohamed, B., Lorenz, A., Pscheida, D.
- Interview Duration in Web Surveys: Integrating Different Levels of Explanation; 2013; Rossmann, J., Gummer, T.
- The monetary value of good questionnaire design; 2013; Tress, F.
- Technical and methodological meta-information on current practices in online research: A full population...; 2013; Burger, C., Stieger, S.
- Using interactive feedback to enhance response quality in Web surveys. The case of open-ended questions...; 2013; Emde, M., Fuchs, M.
- Reducing Response Order Effects in Check-All-That-Apply Questions by Use of Dynamic Tooltip Instructions...; 2013; Kunz, T., Fuchs, M.
- Slide to ruin data: How slider scales may negatively affect data quality and what to do about it; 2013; Funke, F.
- Measuring wages via a volunteer web survey – a cross-national analysis of item nonresponse; 2013; Steinmetz, S., Annmaria, B.
- Identifying and Mitigating Satisficing in Web Surveys: Some Experimental Evidence; 2013; Blumenstiel, J. E., Rossmann, J.
- Does one really know?: Avoiding noninformative answers in a reliable way.; 2013; de Leeuw, E. D., Boevee, A., Hox, J.
- Online Mixed Mode Surveying using a Responsive Design; 2013; Kissau, K.
- Sensitive Topics in PC and Mobile Web Surveys; 2013; Mavletova, A. M., Couper, M. P.
- Mobile Research Performance: How Mobile Respondents Differ from PC Users Concerning Interview Quality...; 2013; Schmidt, S., Wenzel, O.
- Who responds to website visitor satisfaction surveys?; 2013; Andreadis, I.
- Measuring working conditions in a volunteer web survey; 2013; de Pedraza, P., Villacampa, A.
- 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.
- Comparison of psychometric properties of internet versions of the Marlowe-Crowne Social Desirability...; 2013; Vesteinsdottir, V., Reips, U. -D., Joinson, A. N., Porsdottir, F.
- Why are you leaving me?? - Personality predictors of answering drop out in an online-study; 2013; Thielsch, M., Nestler, S., Back, M.
- Propensity Score Weighting – Can Personality Adjust for Selectivity?; 2013; Glantz, A., Greszki, R.
- Research Design as an Influencing Factor for Reliability in Online Market Research; 2013; Wengrzik, J., Theuner, G.

