Web Survey Bibliography
Relevance & Research Question: Most ethical codes around the world require researchers to give some information to the respondent about the nature of the survey they are asking them to undertake. In traditional modes it was part of the job of the interviewer to ensure that people did not exclude themselves on the basis that they may not have views of interest (“your opinion counts!”), or that they may not ‘qualify’ (“all opinions count!”). Since we solicited people, they did not offer themselves to us, there were few ways they could self-select into a telephone or face-to-face study. With online research, and particularly access panel based research, respondents can actively choose to take part in any one of many invitations they receive, based on interest or perceived chances of qualification. The possibility of bias in interest in the subject matter questions the validity of the data collected and the projectability of the sample.
Methods & Data: We investigate three different categories, Pets, Automobiles and Sports. In each case we will be both specific about the item within the category (Dogs, Sports Cars and Football) and just use the general category heading. Experimental treatments reflect the solicitation methods available to us: the direct invitation that clearly mentions the subject matter; and using a router to direct willing respondents to a survey where they will be presented with an introduction stating the subject matter. Finally the survey is presented as an omnibus – a survey with many subjects – this will be both directly invited as well as being placed in the router, the survey here will contain all three subjects. Key dependent variables in the survey proper will be depth of interest in the subject matter.
Results: The survey has not been undertaken as yet. We do not foresee any issues completing the fieldwork and analysis since we would be utilizing our own resources.
Added Value: As a result of this research researchers will understand better the phenomenon of interest bias and how it can be overcome by proper use of modern solicitation methods and messages.
Web survey bibliography - General Online Research Conference (GOR) 2014 (29)
- Using Paradata to Predict and to Correct for Panel Attrition in a Web-based Panel Survey; 2014; Rossmann, J., Gummer, T.
- Targeting the bias – the impact of mass media attention on sample composition and representativeness...; 2014; Steinmetz, S., Oez, F., Tijdens, K. G.
- Offline Households in the German Internet Panel; 2014; Bossert, D., Holthausen, A., Krieger, U.
- Which fieldwork method for what target group? How to improve response rate and data quality; 2014; Wulfert, T., Woppmann, A.
- Exploring selection biases for developing countries - is the web a promising tool for data collection...; 2014; Tijdens, K. G., Steinmetz, S.
- Evaluating mixed-mode redesign strategies against benchmark surveys: the case of the Crime Victimization...; 2014; Klausch, L. T., Hox, J., Schouten, B.
- 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.
- 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.