Web survey bibliography (183)

Page:

• 1
• 2
• 3
• 4

• Using experts’ consensus (the Delphi method) to evaluate weighting techniques in web surveys not...; 2017; Toepoel, V.; Emerson, H.
• A Partially Successful Attempt to Integrate a Web-Recruited Cohort into an Address-Based Sample; 2017; Kott, P. S., Farrelly, M., Kamyab, K.
• Overview: Online Surveys; 2017; Vehovar, V.; Lozar Manfreda, K.
• Inferences from Internet Panel Studies and Comparisons with Probability Samples; 2016; Lachan, R.; Boyle, J.; Harding, R.
• Integration of a phone-based household travel survey and a web-based student travel survey; 2016; Verreault, H.; Morency, C.
• Estimation and Adjustment of Self-Selection Bias in Volunteer Panel Web Surveys ; 2016; Niu, Ch.
• Calculating Standard Errors for Nonprobability Samples when Matching to Probability Samples ; 2016; Lee, Ad.; ZuWallack, R. S.
• Establishing the accuracy of online panels for survey research; 2016; Bruggen, E.; van den Brakel, J.; Krosnick, J. A.
• Evaluating Three Approaches to Statistically Adjust for Mode Effects; 2016; Kolenikov, S.; Kennedy, C.
• Linearization Variance Estimators for Mixed ‒ mode Survey Data when Response Indicators are Modeled...; 2016; Demnati, A.
• Options for Fielding and Analyzing Web Surveys; 2016; Schonlau, M.; Couper, M. P.
• Report of the Inquiry into the 2015 British general election opinion polls; 2016; Sturgis, P., Baker, N., Callegaro, M., Fisher, St., Green, J., Jennings, W., Kuha, J., Lauderdale, B...
• Solving the Nonresponse Problem With Sample Matching?; 2016
• Online and Social Media Data As an Imperfect Continuous Panel Survey; 2016; Diaz, F.; Garmon, F.; Hofman, J. K.; Kiciman, E.; Rothschild, D.
• Quota Controls in Survey Research.; 2016; Gittelman, S. H.; Thomas, R. K.; Lavrakas, P. J.; Lange, V.
• Scientific Surveys Based on Incomplete Sampling Frames and High Rates of Nonresponse; 2016; Fahimi, M.; Barlas, F. M.; Thomas, R. K.; Buttermore, N. R.
• Doing Surveys Online ; 2016; Toepoel, V.
• Using Mobile Phones for High-Frequency Data Collection; 2015; Azevedo, J. P.; Ballivian, A.; Durbin, W.
• On Bias Adjustments for Web Surveys; 2015; Fan, L.; Lou, W.; Landsman, V.
• The quality of data collected using online panels: a decade of research ; 2015; Callegaro, M.
• Does the use of mobile devices (tablets and smartphones) affect survey quality and choice behaviour...; 2015; Liebe, U., Glenk, K., Oehlmann, M., Meyerhoff, J.
• Web-based survey, calibration, and economic impact assessment of spending in nature based recreation; 2015; Paudel, K. P., Devkota, N., Gyawali, B.
• Using Web Panels for Official Statistics; 2014; Bethlehem, J.
• Self-reported cheating in web surveys on political knowledge; 2014; Jensen, C., Thomsen, J. P. F.
• Keeping Surveys Valid, Reliable, and Useful: A Tutorial; 2014; Greenberg, M. R., Weiner, M. D.
• Prioritisation of alternatives with analytical hierarchy process plus response latency and web survey...; 2014; Barone, S. Errore, A., Lombardo, A.
• 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.
• Using Paradata to Predict and to Correct for Panel Attrition in a Web-based Panel Survey; 2014; Rossmann, J., Gummer, T.
• Improving cheater detection in web-based randomized response using client-side paradata; 2014; Dombrowski, K., Becker, C.
• Modelling ”don’t know” responses in rating scales; 2014; Manisera, M., Zuccolotto, P.
• User Modeling via Machine Learning and Rule-Based Reasoning to Understand and Predict Errors in Survey...; 2013; Stuart, L. C.
• Comparison of Three Modes for a Crime Victimization Survey; 2013; Laaksonen, S., Heiskanen, M.
• The Short-term Campaign Panel of the German Longitudinal Election Study 2009. Design, Implementation...; 2013; Steinbrecher, M., Rossmann, J.
• Too Fast, Too Straight, Too Weird: Post Hoc Identification of Meaningless Data in Internet ; 2013; Leiner, D. J.
• Assessing Nonresponse Bias in the Green Technologies and Practices Survey; 2013; Meekins, B., Sverchkov, M., Stang, S.
• Web Panel Representativeness; 2013; Bianchi, A., Biffignandi, S.
• On the Impact of Response Patterns on Survey Estimates from Access Panels; 2013; Enderle, T., Muennich, R., Bruch, C.
• Unit Nonresponse and Weighting Adjustments: A Critical Review; 2013; Brick, J. M.
• Adjusting for bias in a mixed-mode CAWI survey on University students ; 2013; Clerici, R., Giraldo, A.
• A probability-based web panel for the UK: What could it look like?; 2013; Nicolaas, G.
• Panel Attrition: Separating Stayers, Sleepers and Other Types of Drop-Out in an Internet Panel; 2013; Lugtig, P. J.
• Speeding and Non-Differentiation in Web Surveys: Evidence of Correlation and Strategies for Reduction...; 2013; Zhang, Che.
• Web Versus Outbound: A Mode Face-Off Following the Presidential Debate; 2013; Marlar, J.
• The Effects of Errors in Paradata on Weighting Class Adjustments: A Simulation Study; 2013; West, B. T.
• Practical tools for designing and weighting survey samples; 2013; Valliant, R. L., Daver, J. A., Kreuter, F.
• Moving an established survey online – or not?; 2013; Barber, T., Chilvers, D., Kaul, S.
• Measuring working conditions in a volunteer web survey; 2013; de Pedraza, P., Villacampa, A.
• Propensity Score Weighting – Can Personality Adjust for Selectivity?; 2013; Glantz, A., Greszki, R.
• Eurobarometer Special surveys: Special Eurobarometer 381; 2012

Page:

• 1
• 2
• 3
• 4