Web Survey Bibliography
Relevance & Research Questions:
Many Market research institutes followed the statement of Brad Bortner who said in 2008 “Market research online communities (MROCs) will shock the qualitative market research world. They provide cheaper, faster, and newer types of insights that today's traditional qualitative research modes, such as focus groups, don't currently provide.” The following research project is challenging this statement by analyzing the special types of insights MROCs provide in comparison to traditional focus groups. In this project the effectiveness of the two methods should be tested in two aspects: First the amount of information und second the determination of individual opinions and qualtitative insights.
Methods & Data:
In order to evaluate the different possibilities of these two methodological approaches four focus and online groups have been conducted to better understand the purchase intention of customers concerning sustainability. Every group discussion (online and offline) focused on a different industry sector: clothing, cosmetics, food products and hardware for personal hygiene. First, the participants have been asked about their common buying behaviour and their estimation of the importance of sustainability. After that manufactures effort to incorporate sustainability in their array of products has been discussed and also the credibility of these activities has been evaluated. The online community groups were designed as closed groups and each focus and online group consisted of six participants.
Because this research is in progress final results are not yet available. Regarding the amount of information it is expected that the online groups reveal more information because differences between introverted and extroverted personalities are leveled. In terms of individual opinions the online groups should provide better as participants are not exposed to any pressure of conformity. In focus groups people tend to converge their opinions due to the pressure of conformity of the attending group.
Through this research project detailed insights regarding the advantages and disadvantages of both methods can be asserted. The results will help to determine the appropriate approach for future research questions.
Conference Homepage (abstract) / (full text)
Web Survey Bibliography - Germany (417)
- Effects of Lotteries on Response Behavior in Online Panels; 2013; Goeritz, A., Luthe, S. C.
- Lotteries and study results in market research online panels; 2013; Goeritz, A., Luthe, S. C.
- Cognitive Probes in Web Surveys: On the Effect of Different Text Box Size and Probing Exposure on Response...; 2013; Behr, D., Bandilla, W., Kaczmirek, L., Braun, M.
- Pros and cons of virtual interviewers – vote in the discussion about surveytainment; 2013; Póltorak, M., Kowalski, J.
- 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.
- Ethics, privacy and data security in web-based course evaluation; 2013; Salaschek, M., Meese, C., Thielsch, M.
- Seducing the respondent – how to optimise invitations in on-site online research?; 2013; Póltorak, M., Kowalski, J.
- Influence of mobile devices in online surveys; 2013; Maxl, E., Baumgartner, T.
- E-questionnaire in cross-sectional household surveys; 2013; Karaganis, M.
- GESIS Online Panel Pilot: Results from a Probability-Based Online Access Panel; 2013; Kaczmirek, L., Bandilla, W., Schaurer, I., Struminskaya, B., Weyandt, K.
- Online Survey – Research with children on advertising impact; 2013; Funkenweh, V., Busch, J., Amthor, A. L., Boeer, A., Gaedke, J.
- HTML5 and mobile Web surveys: A Web experiment on new input types; 2013; Funke, F.
- Metadata on the demographics of online research: Results from a full-range study of available online...; 2013; Burger, C., Stieger, S.
- How the screen-out influence the dropout of a commercial panel; 2013; Bartoli, B.
- Beyond methodology - some ethical implications of "doing research online"; 2013; Heise, N.
- 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.
- 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.
- WebSM Study: Speed and efficiency of online survey tools; 2012; Cehovin, G.; Vehovar, V.
- Metering mobile usage. Insights from global Arbitron mobile trends panel; 2012; Verkasalo, H.
- Is „chapterisation“ a viable alternative to traditional progress indicators ?; 2012; Spicer, R., Dowling, Z.
- Online Questionnaires: Development of ‘basic requirements’; 2012; Tries, S., Blanke, K.
- Pros and cons of Internet based User Satisfaction Surveys; 2012; Consoli, A., Matsulevits, L.
- Between demand and reality: Ensuring efficiency and quality in pretesting questionnaires; 2012; Sattelberger, S., Blanke, K.
- How to provide high data quality in online-questionnaires: Setting guidelines in design; 2012; Tries, S., Nebel, S., Blanke, K.