Web Survey Bibliography
The Confirmit Annual MR Software survey, now in its eighth year, is conducted annually by meaning ltd, an independent research technology consultancy in London, UK. The survey provides a unique set of information and insights into the interplay of technology and methodology within the market research industry. It provides a snapshot of current usage and attitudes and predictions from practitioners, and identifies trends from a number of tracking questions that are asked repeatedly each year. This year (and in several previous years), the survey has been kindly sponsored by Confirmit, and is therefore known as the Confirmit Market Research Software Survey. The survey comprises a sample of 230 market research companies globally, selecting individuals who are responsible for, influential in or aware of technology decisions within their company. The sample is drawn to ensure representation of three global regions: North America, Europe and Asia Pacific, balanced to represent the relative amount of research carried in these regions, according to figures published by ESOMAR. The survey consists of a self-completion interview on the Web, comprising around sixty questions and timed to last approximately fifteen minutes. Sample is obtained from a variety of sources:
- Participants who agreed to be re-contacted from the previous year’s survey
- Sample compiled by meaning ltd including
- Sample provided by the survey’s sponsor, Confirmit
- Sample from 2009 and 2010 surveys
We estimate the response rate (measured as the number of effective invitations issued, after the removal of bounce-backs, divided by the number of complete interviews achieved) to be 6% (compared with 10% in 2010). However, our invitation makes it clear that the survey is concerned with research technology, and is addressed to those who are decision-makers or influential in technology decisions, so we are aware that there is an unknown level of screening out taking place before any response is recorded. A truer measure of response would be among those eligible to participate (senior technology practitioners within research companies), and that we are unable to calculate. The survey has succeeded in including a large proportion of senior people within the target group from bona fide research companies. Furthermore, many of the trends measured by the survey show a high level of consistency with previous years, so we do consider that the findings are of value. However, due to the nature of the sample, as in pervious years, we do not attempt to estimate a margin of error, and advise caution in the interpretation of the findings. This report concludes with an analysis of the sample composition, in Chapter 11 (p, 72) The 2011 Survey, as in previous years, comprises a mixture of tracking questions and new questions for that year, which explore topics of the moment. For 2011, we have explored four such topics: Handling unstructured text (Chapter 3, p. 22), ‘New MR’ methods (Chapter 4, p. 30), Smartphone usage on conventional online surveys (Chapter 5, p. 42) and Data Visualization (Chapter 6, p. 46). Tracking questions follow in Chapters 6 onwards (starting on p. 46).
meaning Itd Homepage (abstract) / (full text)
Web survey bibliography (457)
- Handbook of Research Methods in Health Social Sciences; 2017; Liamputtong, P.
- Necessary but Insufficient: Why Measurement Invariance Tests Need Online Probing as a Complementary...; 2017; Meitinger, K.
- Device and Internet Use among Spanish-dominant Hispanics: Implications for Web Survey Design and Testing...; 2017; Trejo, Y. A. G.; Schoua-Glusberg, A.
- Role of online survey tools in creating temporally accurate Environmental Product Declarations (EPD)...; 2017; Ganguly, I.; Bowers, T.; Pierobon, F.; Eastin, I.
- CAQDAS at a Crossroads: Affordances of Technology in an Online Environment; 2017; Silver, C.; Bulloch, L. S.
- Development and Pilot Test of a Mobile Application for Field Data Collection; 2016; Chiappetta, L.; Kerr, M. M.
- A streamlined approach to online linguistic surveys; 2016; Erlewine, M. Y.; Kotek, H.
- The Effects of Vignette Placement on Attitudes Toward Supporting Family Members; 2016; Lau, C. Q., Seltzer, J. A., Bianchi, S. M.
- Using Web Panels to Quantify the Qualitative: The National Center for Health Statistics Research and...; 2016; Scanlon, P. J.
- Bees to Honey or Flies to Manure? How the Usual Subject Recruitment Exacerbates the Shortcomings of...; 2016; Snell, S. A., Hillygus, D. S.
- The Use of a Nonprobability Internet Panel to Monitor Sexual and Reproductive Health in the General...; 2015; Legleye, S; Charrance, G.; Razafindratsima, N.; Bajos, N.; Bohet, A.; Moreau, C.
- GreenBook Research Industry Trends Report; 2015; Murphy, L. (Ed.)
- Does Sequence Matter in Multimode Surveys: Results from an Experiment; 2014; Wagner, J., Arrieta, J., Guyer, H., Ofstedal, M. B.
- The Use of Cognitive Interviewing Methods to Evaluate Mode Effects in Survey Questions; 2014; Gray, M., Blake, M., Campanelli, P.
- Build your own social network laboratory with Social Lab: a tool for research in social media; 2014; Garaizar, P., Reips, U.-D.
- Using Eye Tracking to Evaluate Email Notifications of Surveys and Online Surveys Collecting Address...; 2014; Olmsted, E. L., Nichols, E. M.
- Correlates of Attrition in the German Internet Panel: Drop-Outs and Sleepers; 2014; Blom, A. G., Beissel-Durrant, G.
- Survey Breakoff in Online Panels; 2014; McCutcheon, A. L.
- Inside the Turk Understanding Mechanical Turk as a Participant Pool; 2014; Paolacci, G., Chandler, J.
- Nonresponse and measurement error in an online panel; 2014; Roberts, C., Allum, N., Sturgis, P.
- Estimating the effects of nonresponses in online panels through imputation; 2014; Zhang, W.
- Professional respondents in nonprobability online panels; 2014; Hillygus, D. S., Jackson, N. M., Young, M.
- Informing panel members about study results; 2014; Scherpenzeel, A., Toepoel, V.
- Determinants of the starting rate and the completion rate in online panel studies; 2014; Goeritz, A.
- The untold story of multi-mode (online and mail) consumer panels; 2014; McCutcheon, A. L., Rao, K., Kaminska, O.
- Online panels and validity; 2014; Groenlund, K., Strandberg, K.
- Assessing representativeness of a probability-based online panel in Germany; 2014; Struminskaya, B., Kaczmirek, L., Schaurer, I., Bandilla, W.
- A critical review of studies investigating the quality of data obtained with online panels based on...; 2014; Callegaro, M., Villar, A., Yeager, D. S., Krosnick, J. A.
- Online panel research: History, concepts, applications and a look at the future; 2014; Callegaro, M., Baker, R., Bethlehem, J., Goeritz, A., Krosnick, J. A., Lavrakas, P. J.
- Motives for joining nonprobability online panels and their association with survey participation behavior...; 2014; Keusch, F., Batinic, B., Mayerhofer, W.
- Targeting the bias – the impact of mass media attention on sample composition and representativeness...; 2014; Steinmetz, S., Oez, F., Tijdens, K. G.
- Exploring selection biases for developing countries - is the web a promising tool for data collection...; 2014; Tijdens, K. G., Steinmetz, S.
- The quality of ego-centered social network data in web surveys: experiments with a visual elicitation...; 2014; Marcin, B., Matzat, U., Snijders, C.
- Switching the polarity of answer options within the questionnaire and using various numbering schemes...; 2014; Struminskaya, B., Schaurer, I., Bosnjak, M.
- Measuring the very long, fuzzy tail in the occupational distribution in web-surveys; 2014; Tijdens, K. G.
- Interest Bias – An Extreme Form of Self-Selection?; 2014; Cape, P. J., Reichert, K.
- Online Qualitative Research – Personality Matters ; 2014; Tress, F., Doessel, C.
- Recent Books and Journals in Public Opinion, Survey Methods, and Survey Statistics; 2014; Callegaro, M.
- Does Gamification Work? - A Literature Review of Empirical Studies on Gamification ; 2014; Hamari, J., Koivisto, J., Sarsa, H.
- The Use of Paradata to Predict Future Cooperation in a Panel Study; 2014; Funke, F., Goeritz, A.
- Pret met panels [Fun online]; 2013; Roberts, A., de Leeuw, E. D., Hox, J., Klausch, L. T., de Jongh, A.
- The Short-term Campaign Panel of the German Longitudinal Election Study 2009. Design, Implementation...; 2013; Steinbrecher, M., Rossmann, J.
- The Future of Social Media, Sociality, and Survey Research; 2013; Hill, C., Dever, J. A.
- Second Life as a Survey Lab: Exploring the Randomized Response Technique in a Virtual Setting; 2013; Richards, A., Dean, E.
- Virtual Cognitive Interviewing Using Skype and Second Life; 2013; Dean, E., Head, B., Swicegood, J. E.
- Social Media, Sociality, and Survey Research; 2013; Hill, C., Dean, E., Murphy, J.
- Investigation of background acoustical effect on online surveys: A case study of a farmers' market...; 2013; Tang, Xi.
- Should the third reminder be sent? The role of survey response timing on web survey results; 2013; Rao, K., Pennington, J.
- Web panel surveys – can they be designed and used in a scientifically sound way?; 2013; Svensson, J.
- Using an Item Response Theory Approach to Measure Survey Mode of Administration Effects: Analysis of...; 2013; Mariano, L. T., Elliott, M. N.