Web Survey Bibliography
Background: The public typically believes psychotherapy to be more effective than pharmacotherapy for depression treatments. This is not consistent with current scientific evidence, which shows that both types of treatment are about equally effective.
Objective: The study investigates whether this bias towards psychotherapy guides online information search and whether the bias can be reduced by explicitly providing expert information (in a blog entry) and by providing tag clouds that implicitly reveal experts’ evaluations.
Methods: A total of 174 participants completed a fully automated Web-based study after we invited them via mailing lists. First, participants read two blog posts by experts that either challenged or supported the bias towards psychotherapy. Subsequently, participants searched for information about depression treatment in an online environment that provided more experts’ blog posts about the effectiveness of treatments based on alleged research findings. These blogs were organized in a tag cloud; both psychotherapy tags and pharmacotherapy tags were popular. We measured tag and blog post selection, efficacy ratings of the presented treatments, and participants’ treatment recommendation after information search.
Conclusions: We conclude that the psychotherapy bias is most effectively attenuated—and even eliminated—when popular tags implicitly point to blog posts that challenge the widespread view. Explicit expert information (in a blog entry) was less successful in reducing biased information search and evaluation. Since tag clouds have the potential to counter biased information processing, we recommend their insertion.
Homepage (Abstract)/ (Full text)
Web survey bibliography (4086)
- 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.
- Social Media and Surveys: Collaboration, Not Competition; 2014; Couper, M. P.
- Improving cheater detection in web-based randomized response using client-side paradata; 2014; Dombrowski, K., Becker, C.
- Interest Bias – An Extreme Form of Self-Selection?; 2014; Cape, P. J., Reichert, K.
- Online Qualitative Research – Personality Matters ; 2014; Tress, F., Doessel, C.
- Increasing data quality in online surveys 4.1; 2014; Hoeckel, H.
- Moving answers with the GyroScale: Using the mobile device’s gyroscope for market research purposes...; 2014; Luetters, H., Kraus, M., Westphal, D.
- The effectiveness of recruitment strategies on general practitioner's survey response rates - a...; 2014; Pit, S. W., Pyakurel, S., Vo, T.
- Respondent-Driven Sampling of Heterosexuals at Increased Risk of HIV Infection; 2014; Batra, P., Gray, S. C., Krishna, N., Prachand, N., Robinson, W. T., Wejnert, C.
- Two Are Better Than One: The Use of a Mixed-Mode Data Collection to Improve the Electoral Forecast; 2014; de Rada, V. D., Pasadas del Amo, S.
- Social desirability is the same in offline, online, and paper surveys: A meta-analysis; 2014; Dodou, D., de Winter J. C. F.
- The impact of contact effort on mode-specific selection and measurement bias; 2014; Schouten, B., van der Laan, J., Cobben, F.
- Recent Books and Journals in Public Opinion, Survey Methods, and Survey Statistics; 2014; Callegaro, M.
- User-Generated Online Health Content: A Survey of Internet Users in the United Kingdom; 2014; Ziebland, S., Valderas, J., Lupianiez-Villanueva, F., O'Neill, B.
- Confirmation Bias in Web-Based Search: A Randomized Online Study on the Effects of Expert Information...; 2014; Schweiger, S., Oeberst, A., Cress, U.
- Social Media and Online Survey: Tools for Knowledge Management in Health Research ; 2014; Merolli, M., Sanchez, F. J. M., Gray, K.
- Using Online Social Media for Recruitment of Human Immunodeficiency Virus-Positive Participants: A Cross...; 2014; Yuan, P., Bare, M. G., Johnson, M. O., Saberi, P.
- Mobile Technologies for Conducting, Augmenting and Potentially Replacing Surveys: Report of the AAPOR...; 2014; Link, M. W., Murphy, J., Schober, M. F., Buskirk, T. D., Childs, J. H., Tesfaye, C.
- Undisclosed Privacy: The Effect of Privacy Rights Design on Response Rates; 2014; Haer, R., Meidert, N.
- Modelling ”don’t know” responses in rating scales; 2014; Manisera, M., Zuccolotto, P.
- Do Incentives Commoditize Surveys Or Reinforce The Relationship Economy?; 2014; Murphy, L.
- Does Gamification Work? - A Literature Review of Empirical Studies on Gamification ; 2014; Hamari, J., Koivisto, J., Sarsa, H.
- Clicking vs. Dragging: Different Uses of the Mouse and Their Implications for Online Surveys; 2014; Sikkel, D., Steenbergen, R., Gras, S.
- The Effect of Benefit Wording on Consent to Link Survey and Administrative Records in a Web Survey; 2014; Sakshaug, J. W., Kreuter, F.
- Completion rates and non-response error in online surveys: Comparing sweepstakes and pre-paid cash incentives...; 2014; LaRose, R., Tsai, H. S.
- The accuracy of self-reported medical history: A preliminary analysis of the promise of internet-based...; 2014; Kelstrup, A. M., Juillerat, P., Korzenik, J.
- Panel Attrition - Separating Stayers, Fast Attriters, Gradual Attriters, and Lurkers; 2014; Lugtig, P. J.
- Dropout Rates and Response Times of an Occupation Search Tree in a Web Survey; 2014; Tijdens, K. G.
- The use of within-subject experiments for estimating measurement effects in mixed-mode surveys ; 2014; Klausch, L. T., Schouten, B., Hox, J.
- Is it what you say, or how you say It? An experimental analysis of the effects of invitation wording...; 2014; Fazekas, Z., Wall, M. T., Krouwel, A.
- Improving the Representativeness of Online Surveys ; 2014; Henning, J.
- GESIS Panel: Sample and Recruitment; 2014
- Online Surveys as a Management Tool for Monitoring Multicultual Virtual Team Processes; 2014; Scovotti, C.
- How much is shorter CAWI questionnaire VS CATI questionnaire?; 2014; Bartoli, B.
- WEBDATANET: A Network on Web-based Data Collection, Methodological Challenges, Solutions, and Implementation...; 2014; Tijdens, K. G., Steinmetz, S., de Pedraza, P., Serrano, F.
- The Use of Paradata to Predict Future Cooperation in a Panel Study; 2014; Funke, F., Goeritz, A.
- Incentives on demand in a probability-based online panel: redemption and the choice between pay-out...; 2014; Schaurer, I., Struminskaya, B., Kaczmirek, L.
- The Effect of De-Contextualisation - A Comparison of Response Behaviour in Self-Administered Surveys; 2014; Wetzelhuetter, D.
- Responsive designed web surveys; 2014; Dreyer, M., Reich, M., Schwarzkopf, K.
- Extra incentives for extra efforts – impact of incentives for burdensome tasks within an incentivized...; 2014; Schreier, J. H., Biethahn, N., Drewes, F.
- Students First Choice – the influence of mobile mode on results; 2014; Maxl, E.
- Device Effects: How different screen sizes affect answer quality in online questionnaires; 2014; Fischer, B., Bernet, F.
- Moving towards mobile ready web panels; 2014; Wijnant, A., de Bruijne, M.
- Innovation for television research - online surveys via HbbTV. A new technology with fantastic opportunities...; 2014; Herche, J., Adler, M.
- Mixed-devices in a probability based panel survey. Effects on survey measurement error; 2014; Toepoel, V., Lugtig, P. J.
- Online mobile surveys in Italy: coverage and other methodological challenges; 2014; Poggio, T.
- Distress Tolerance as a Predictor of Risky and Aggressive Driving; 2014; Beck, K. H., Ali, B., Daughters, S. B.
- African-American breast cancer survivors’ preferences for various types of physical activity interventions...; 2014; Paxton, R., Nayak, P., Taylor, W., Chang, S., Courneya, K., Schover, L., Hodges, K., Jones, L.