Web Survey Bibliography
Relevance and Research Question:
It is well-documented that online surveys elicit higher reports of socially undesirable behavior than interviewer-administered surveys. However, there are possible exceptions, where the form of the question may inhibit the revelation of prejudicial attitudes. In research exploring race of interviewer effects, Krysan and Couper (2003) found some instances where white respondents (for example) gave more negative responses to interviewers than to computerized instruments. In qualitative debriefings, some respondents noted that talking to an interviewer gave them an opportunity to explain their choice of responses; in the CASI condition (as on the Web; see Krysan and Couper, 2005), they could only pick one of the response options, without the opportunity to justify their choice. We called this the “I’m not a racist, but…” phenomenon. An online experiment was designed to explore the hypothesis that, when given an opportunity to explain or clarify their answers, respondents will give more prejudicial responses.
Methods and Data:
Two experiments were embedded in the LISS online probability-based panel in the Netherlands. In both cases a set of 9 items on attitudes toward immigrants was asked. In the first study, conducted in August 2009 (n=4639), a random half received an open-ended question on a separate page following each closed question. In the second study, conducted in December 2010 (n=5328), for a random half of respondents, an optional open-ended comment appeared below each closed-ended question on the same page.
Results:
The results provide support for the hypothesis. In both cases, respondents given the open question gave significantly more prejudiced responses (F[1, 4352]=25.6, p<.001 for Exp. 1 and F[1, 5326]=7.1, p=0.008 for Exp. 2) than those getting only the closed-ended question. However, contrary to expectation, the effect was larger in experiment 1 than 2. We explore this finding in greater detail, examining both responses to individual items and those who made use of the text box to offer comments.
Added Value:
This study suggests value in giving respondents the opportunity to voice their opinions in their own words, rather than just requiring them to agree or disagree with one of the response options.
GOR Homepage (abstract) / (presentation)
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.
