Web Survey Bibliography
Although comprehension is critical to the survey response process, much about it remains unknown. Research has shown that concepts can be clarified through the use of definitions, instructions or examples, but respondents do not necessarily attend to these clarifications. This dissertation presents the results of three experiments designed to investigate where and how to present clarifying information most effectively. In the first experiment, eight study questions, modeled after questions in major federal surveys, were administered as part of a Web survey. The results suggest that clarification improves comprehension of the questions. There is some evidence from that initial experiment that respondents anticipate the end of a question and are more likely to ignore clarification that comes after the question than before it. However, there is considerable evidence to suggest that clarifications are most effective when they are incorporated into a series of questions. A second experiment was conducted in both a Web and Interactive Voice Response (IVR) survey. IVR was chosen because it controlled for the effects of interviewers. The results of this experiment suggest that readers appear no more capable of comprehending complex clarification than listeners. In both channels, instructions were least likely to be followed when they were presented after the question, more likely to be followed when they were placed before the question, and most likely to be followed when they were incorporated into a series of questions. Finally, in a third experiment, five variables were varied to examine the use of examples in survey questions. Broad categories elicited higher reports than narrow categories and frequently consumed examples elicited higher reports than infrequently consumed examples. The implication of this final study is that the choice of categories and examples require careful consideration, as this choice will influence respondents' answers, but it does not seem to matter where and how a short list of examples are presented.
University of Maryland (abstract) / (full text)
Web survey bibliography - 2011 (358)
- Mass informed consent: Evidence on upgrading democracy with polls and new media; 2011; Simon, A. F.
- Latent class analysis of survey error; 2011; Biemer, P. P.
- Just published: Forrester Wave™ of enterprise feedback management satisfaction and loyalty solutions...; 2011; McInnes, A.
- ISER working paper 2011-31. Is it a good idea to optimise question format for mode of data collection...; 2011; Nicolaas, G., Campanelli, P., Hope, S., Jaeckle, A., Lynn, P.
- Involve while you evolve. How to make mobile research work for everyone; 2011; Luck, K.
- Internet access quarterly update 2011 Q1; 2011
- Households with Computers, Telephone Subscriptions, and Internet Access, Selected Years, 1997 - 2010; 2011
- Harvard research data security policy; 2011
- GRE® program announces big benefits and big savings for GRE® test takers worldwide; 2011
- Google and Kantar develop measurement panel; 2011
- Going online with assessment; 2011; Burke, E., Mahoney-Phillips, J., Bowler, W., Downey, K.
- Global market research 2011; 2011
- Focus Group Methodology: Principle and Practice; 2011; Liamputtong, P.
- External preference mapping of commercial antiaging creams based on consumers' responses to a check...; 2011; Parente, M. E., Manzoni, A. V., Ares, G.
- Experiments for evaluating survey questions; 2011; Krosnick, J. A.
- Evaluating the usability of personal digital assistants to collect behavioral data on adolescents with...; 2011; McClamroch, K. J.
- Eurobarometer Special surveys: EB75.1 E-Communications Household Survey. Special Eurobarometer 362; 2011
- Survey Data Quality Provisions in Statistics Canada E-Questionnaire Solution: Retrospective and Perspectives...; 2011; Abiza, Y.
- Developing Electronic Questionnaire Guidelines: Issues and Challenges in a Changing Environment; 2011; Cote, A.-M., Kelly, P., Lawrence, D.
- Triton: a general tool for data collection and micro editing; 2011; Erikson, J.
- A Generalized System for Aided Development and Monitoring of Web Surveys; 2011; Torelli, R.
- Ethical issues in Internet research; 2011; Hoerger, M., Currell, C.
- Using survey data collection as a tool for improving the survey process; 2011; Biffignandi, S., Perani, G., Laureti, A.
- Essential methods for design based sample surveys; 2011; Pfeffermann, D., Rao, C. R.
- A picnic in the field; negotiating the presentation of the self in researcher/respondent relationships...; 2011; Parsons, J.
- The benefits and constraints of e-mail interviews and discussions as methods of accessing valid data; 2011; Roberts, An.
- Is There a Quick Fix for Open-ended Questions? A Comparison of Qualitative Analysis Techniques; 2011; Langer Tesfaye, C.
- The Impact of Open-Ended Questions: A Multivariate Study of Respondent Engagement; 2011; Gittelman, S. H.
- “You are Invited to Participate”: Challenges of Applying Mixed Survey Methods to Assess...; 2011; Chew, F.
- Literacy and Data Quality in Self-Administered Surveys; 2011; Smyth, J. D., Olson, K.
- Catch Them When You Can: Speeders and Their Role in Online Data Quality; 2011; Gutierrez, C., Wells, T., Rao, K., Kurzynski, D.
- Observed Differences in the Placement and Wording of Neutral Response Options in Web Surveys: An Experiment...; 2011; Walton, L., Cobb, C. L., DiSogra, C.
- Does mentioning "some people" and "other people" in a survey question increase the...; 2011; Yeager, D. S., Krosnick, J. A.
- Do not track gathers momentum; 2011; Stark, D.
- “Don’t know” the difference - An experimental comparison between Web and CATI; 2011; Schielicke, A.-M., Degen, M.
- Display resolution; 2011
- A Survey Stopping Rule Based on Weighting for Unit Nonresponse; 2011; Lewis, T.
- Classic Inspirations for Social Research Methodology in the time of Online Access Panels ; 2011; Jerabek, H.
- Five Things You Should Know About Mobile Data Collection; 2011; Pingitore, G.
- Mixed Methods - Analyzing Open-Ended Comments in a Quantitative Employee Survey; 2011; Lawton, L., Broege, N.
- Changing Survey Methods (Discussion); 2011; Lavrakas, P. J.
- Causes of survey incompletes: Why panelists say they abandon surveys; 2011; Henning, J.
- Canadian online panels: Similar or different?; 2011; Chan, P., Ambrose, D.
- Blend, balance, and stabilize respondent sources; 2011; Eggers, M., Drake, E.
- Beyond data stability: Rising above quality concerns; 2011
- Background - QSOAP; 2011
- Audience evolution: New technologies and the transformation of media audiences; 2011; Napoli, P. M.
- Assessing personality traits through response latencies using item response theory; 2011; Ranger, J., Ortner, T. M.
- American public opinion: Its origins, content, and impact (8th Edition); 2011; Erikson, R. S., Tedin, K. L.
- Clarifying Survey Questions; 2011; Redline, C. D.