Web Survey Bibliography
Background
Surveys of doctors are an important data collection method in health services research. Ways to improve response rates, minimise survey response bias and item non-response, within a given budget, have not previously been addressed in the same study. The aim of this paper is to compare the effects and costs of three different modes of survey administration in a national survey of doctors.
Methods
A stratified random sample of 4.9% (2,702/54,160) of doctors undertaking clinical practice was drawn from a national directory of all doctors in Australia. Stratification was by four doctor types: general practitioners, specialists, specialists-in-training, and hospital non-specialists, and by six rural/remote categories. A three-arm parallel trial design with equal randomisation across arms was used. Doctors were randomly allocated to: online questionnaire (902); simultaneous mixed mode (a paper questionnaire and login details sent together) (900); or, sequential mixed mode (online followed by a paper questionnaire with the reminder) (900). Analysis was by intention to treat, as within each primary mode, doctors could choose either paper or online. Primary outcome measures were response rate, survey response bias, item non-response, and cost.
Results
The online mode had a response rate 12.95%, followed by the simultaneous mixed mode with 19.7%, and the sequential mixed mode with 20.7%. After adjusting for observed differences between the groups, the online mode had a 7 percentage point lower response rate compared to the simultaneous mixed mode, and a 7.7 percentage point lower response rate compared to sequential mixed mode. The difference in response rate between the sequential and simultaneous modes was not statistically significant. Both mixed modes showed evidence of response bias, whilst the characteristics of online respondents were similar to the population. However, the online mode had a higher rate of item non-response compared to both mixed modes. The total cost of the online survey was 38% lower than simultaneous mixed mode and 22% lower than sequential mixed mode. The cost of the sequential mixed mode was 14% lower than simultaneous mixed mode. Compared to the online mode, the sequential mixed mode was the most cost-effective, although exhibiting some evidence of response bias.
Conclusions
Decisions on which survey mode to use depend on response rates, response bias, item non-response and costs. The sequential mixed mode appears to be the most cost-effective mode of survey administration for surveys of the population of doctors, if one is prepared to accept a degree of response bias. Online surveys are not yet suitable to be used exclusively for surveys of the doctor population.
Journal Homepage (abstract) / (full text)
Web survey bibliography - 2011 (358)
- The Validity of Surveys: Online and Offline; 2016; Wiersma, W.
- 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.
- Multiple Sources of Nonobservation Error in Telephone Surveys: Coverage and Nonresponse; 2011; Peytchev, A.; Carley-Baxter, L. R.; Black, M. C.
- Online Questionnaires for Outbreak Investigations; 2011; Parry, A. E.; Johnson, D. R.; Byron-Gray, K.; Raupach, J. C. A.; McPherson, M.
- Inventory of published research: Response burden measurement and reduction in official business statistics...; 2011; Giesen, D. & Snijkers, G. (Eds.), Bavdaz, M., Bergstrom, Y., Gravem, D. F., Haraldsen, G., Hedlin, D...
- Effects of speeding on satisficing in Mixed-Mode Surveys; 2011; Bathelt, S., Bauknecht, J.
- Using Research-Based Practices to Increase Response Rates of Web-Based Surveys; 2011; Perkins, R. A.
- Using break-offs in web interviews for predicting web response in mixed mode surveys; 2011; Beukenhorst, D.
- Web panels in Slovenia; 2011; Lenar, J.
- Traditional and non-traditional treatments for autism spectrum disorder with seizures: an on-line survey...; 2011; Frye, R. E., Sreenivasula, S., Adams, J. B.
- Understanding the new digital divide—A typology of Internet users in Europe; 2011; Brandtzæg, P.B.; Heim, J.; Karahasanoviæ, A.
- Patients’ attitudes toward side effects of antidepressants: an Internet survey; 2011; Kikuchi, T., Uchida, H., Suzuki, T., Watanabe, K., Kashima, H.
- Web-based or paper-based surveys: a quandary?; 2011; Bennett, L., Sid Nair, C.
- Refining the Total Survey Error Perspective; 2011; Smith, T. W.
- ELIPSS: Étude Longitudinale par Internet Pour les Sciences Sociales; 2011; Legleye, S., Lesnard, L.
- Less questions, more data: Revitalizing the european currency in single source affluent audience measurement...; 2011; Hartman, H.
- Linking website exposure data to survey data: A single-source solution; 2011; Krahn, J., Landi, J., Melton, E.
- Inference in surveys with sequential mixed-mode data collection; 2011; Buelens, B., van der Brakel, J.
- Using a Probability-based Online Panel to Survey American Jews; 2011; Wright, G., Phillips, B. T., Tobias, J., Peugh, J., Semans, K.
- Choice of Content Presentation Mode in Web-Based Survey Administration; 2011; Osborn, L., Mansfield, W., Ramirez, C. M., Lacey, J. N., etc.
- Seasonal Yield Variation and Related Response Patterns in Address-based Mail Samples; 2011; DiSogra, C., Hendarwan, E.
- Gender-specific on-line shopping preferences; 2011; Ulbrich, F., Christensen, T., Stankus, L.
- Mixing modes in the LFS - Computer-assisted, cost effective and respondent friendly; 2011; Koerner, T., van der Valk, J.
- Peanuts and Monkeys: Incentivisation and engagement in online access panels; 2011; Marks, B.
- Establishing Cross-National Equivalence of Measures of Xenophobia: Evidence from Probing in Web Surveys...; 2011; Braun, M., Behr, D., Kaczmirek, L.
- Methodological challenges in the use of the Internet for scientific research: Ten solutions and recommendations...; 2011; Reips, U.-D., Buchanan, T., Krantz, J. H., McGrawn, K.Reips, U.-D.
- Search and email still top the list of most popular online activities; 2011; Purcell, K.
- Using Internet in Stated Preference Surveys: A Review and Comparison of Survey Modes; 2011; Lindhjem, H., Navrud, S.
- On the experience and evidence about mixing modes of data collection in large-scale surveys where the...; 2011; Dex, S., Gumy, J.
- Survey Gamification: Old Wine in New Bottles?; 2011; Baker, R. P.
- The Game Experiments: Researching how gaming techniques can be used to improve the quality of feedback...; 2011; Sleep, D., Puleston, J.
- Statistical Estimation of Word Acquisition With Application to Readability Prediction; 2011; Kidwell, P., Lebanon, G., Collins-Thompson, K.
- What is Probit; 2011
- Voice-of-the-customer marketing: A revolutionary 5-step process to create customers who care, spend,...; 2011; Roman, E.
- User agent; 2011
- Unpublisihed internal Google report on break off rates by device type; 2011; Callegaro, M.
- Toward wiser public judgment; 2011; Yankelovich, D., Friedman, W.
- The impact of cookie deletion on site-server and ad-server metrics in Australia. An empirical comScore...; 2011
- The changing role of address-based sampling in survey research; 2011; Iannacchione, V. G.
- State of mobile measurement; 2011; Gluck, M.
- Some issues in the application of latent class models for questionnaire design; 2011; Biemer, P. P., Berzofsky, M.
- Self-administered mobile surveys; 2011; Bosnjak, M.
- SDSC Announces scalable, high-performance data storage cloud; 2011
- Ratings and audience measurement; 2011; Napoli, P. M.
- Randomized response models in survey sampling. Randomized response models; 2011; Hussain, Z.
- Online survey research: Findings, best practices, and future research. Report prepared for the Advertising...; 2011; Vannette, D.
- Online survey research: Findings, Best practices, and future research; 2011
- New Esomar survey on use of cookies and tracking technologies; 2011
- Mobile, webmail, desktops: Where are we viewing email now?; 2011
- Measuring americans' issue priorities. A new version of the most important problem question reveals...; 2011; Yeager, D. S., Larson, S. B., Krosnick, J. A., Tompson, T.