Web Survey Bibliography
Relevance & Research Question: Open-ended questions are often used to gather short numeric information in self-administered web questionnaires. Respondents are encouraged to enter numbers, quantities or frequencies into input fields, most often without any computerized formatting constraints predominantly in order to prevent item nonresponse. However, the absence of any formatting restrictions encourages large variances in answers deviating from the desired format, including value ranges, estimations, alphanumeric supplements, or even different measuring units which affect data quality negatively, and increase the efforts for data cleansing and preparation. Thus, concise and clear formatting instructions are needed to guide respondents providing answers in the desired format. Considering the fact that instructions are likely to be ignored the question arises how different modes of verbal instructions and visual cues can be applied to improve the impact of formatting instructions, and finally to enhance data quality.
Methods & Data: In a between-subjects field experiment conducted among university freshman students in an opt-in panel (N=670), we tested different visual modes of formatting instructions in open-ended numeric questions: (1) conventional instruction in a static manner, (2) dynamic instruction in a tooltip appearing when the mouse cursor hovers over the input field, and (3) symbolic instruction in terms of pre-defined default values in the input field indicating the desired response format. The effectiveness of each instruction mode was determined by the proportion of formally correct answers.
Results: Findings indicated that the implementation of dynamic formatting elements in terms of tooltips or default values had no positive effect on an improvement of response quality compared to conventional static formatting instructions. Even a combination of tooltips and pre-filled symbols could not achieve a significant increase in correctly formatted answers compared to the sole presentation of a fixed instruction.
Added Value: The results indicated that static formatting instructions should not be replaced hastily without examining the effect of dynamic elements sufficiently. However, initial findings suggested the potential of dynamic formatting instructions in enhancing the positive effect of conventional instructions.
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.
