Web Survey Bibliography
Relevance & Research Question: Standardized grid question types in online questionnaires can be regarded as the backbone of modern quantitative research. Grid questions allow comparability among different survey waves. Furthermore, it is well proven that varying the way by which grid questions are displayed strongly affects response behavior. Despite its importance in everyday research, this type of questions is lacking the ability of taking full advantage from the opportunities the web currently offers, such as using media elements to express opinions or visualizing certain aspects e.g. by using pictures. Against this background, the authors will explore an innovative approach of the importance-performance-analysis (IPA) whereby respondents are able to position particular customer satisfaction aspects directly on a grid which is divided into four so called action areas: “concentrate here”, “keep up the good work”, “low priority” and “possible overkill”. We will assess whether this approach allows identifying critical performance factors as already known from the traditional IPA. Benefits of this approach could be increasing respondent engagement, time savings and a more distinct prioritization of aspects. Pitfalls like a lack of comprehensibility and satisfaction patterns need to be considered to assess future usage of this approach.
Methods & Data: The authors conducted a customer satisfaction survey via an Online-Access-Panel, applying a split-half-design to examine effects of this new grid replacing question type. Respondents were assigned at random to rate their customer satisfaction statements, either using the traditional Importance-Performance-Analysis (IPA), or the new approach explained above, whereby statements are directly assigned to the 4 field grid. A comparison of both designs will reveal differences among satisfaction and importance ratings. Analysis will also assess the comprehensibility of the grid approach while differences of the interview duration and respondent engagement are being examined as well.
Results: Available by the end of January.
Added Value: The authors will show to what extent a direct assignment of the customer satisfaction statements on the IPA grid can be considered as comprehensible and valid for the purpose of analyzing effects of customer satisfaction, highlighting possible advantages and potential risks, ultimately concluding whether future usage is reasonable and beneficial.
Web survey bibliography (4086)
- Facebook as a Tool for Respondent Tracing; 2015; Schneider, S. J., Burke-Garcia, A., Thomas, G.
- Social Science Survey Methodology Training: Understanding the Past and Assessing the Present to Shape...; 2015; Jans, M., Meyers, M., Fricker, S.
- Internet Research in Psychology; 2015; Gosling, S. D., Mason, W.
- Handbook of Health Survey Methods; 2015; Johnson, T. P. (Ed.)
- Adapting an interviewer - administered survey for web self - completion in a mixed - mode design ; 2015; Betts, P.; Cubbon, B.
- Future Training of Survey Methodologists; 2015; Kolenikov, S., Jans, M., O'Hare, B. C., Fricker, S.
- Automatic data collection on the Internet (web scraping); 2015; Boettcher, I.
- The Impact of Survey Mode (Mail versus Telephone) and Asking About Future Intentions; 2015; Beebe, T. J.
- Offline recruiting of young people for an online survey - what affects response rates; 2015; Zeglovits, E.
- Finding Item Nonresponse Patterns: Three Internet Survey Experiments Into the Effects of Nonresponse...; 2015; Van De Maat, J.
- Placement of the Linkage Consent Question in a Web Survey of Establishments; 2015; Sakshaug, J. W.; Vicari, B.
- The effectiveness of incentives on recruitment and retention rates: an experiment in a web survey; 2015; Mulder, J.; Douhou, S.
- Using WhatsApp as a Survey Tool; 2015; Ongena, Y. P.; Haan, M.
- The Effects of Adding a Mobile-Compatible Design to the American Life Panel; 2015; Toepoel, V.; Lugtig, P. J.; Amin, A.
- Technology and Reporting of Daily Activities – Considerations for Analysis of Behaviours in Mixed...; 2015; Fisher, K.; Gershuny, J.
- Does the Use of Mobile Devices (Tablets and Smartphones) Affect Survey Quality and Choice Behaviour...; 2015; Glenk, K.; Liebe, U.; Oehlmann, M.
- Smartphones @work; 2015; Bittman, M.
- Measurement Error in Discontinuous Online Survey Panels: Panel Conditioning and Data Quality; 2015; Atkeson, L. R.; Adams, A. N.; Karp, J. A.
- Cheating in web surveys. Evidence from a split-ballot repeated experiment on knowledge questions on...; 2015; Ladini, R.; Vezzoni, C.
- Does Personalized Feedback Increase Respondent Motivation?; 2015; Kroh, M.; Kuhne, S.
- Adapting Grid Questions for Mobile Devices; 2015; de Bruijne, M.; Das, M.; van Soest, A.; Wijnant, A.
- Unplanned use of mobile devices in a probabilistic online panel survey: Patterns of use and implications...; 2015; Poggio, T.; Bosnjak, M.; Bandilla, W.; Weyandt, K.
- The importance of scale direction between different modes; 2015; Agalioti-sgompou, V.
- Impact of response scale direction on survey responses in web and mobile web surveys; 2015; Yan, T.; Keusch, F.
- Comparing response order experiments with probability and non-probability samples; 2015; Yeager, D. S.; Krosnick, J. A.; Silber, H.
- Direction of Response Format in Web and Paper & Pencil Surveys; 2015
- Comparison of different mixed-mode and face - to face surveys - response rates and costs; 2015; Ainsaar, M.; Hendrikson, R.
- Nonresponse and Measurement Bias in Web surveys ; 2015; Metzler, A.; Fuchs, M.
- Correlates of early and late responses to surveys in an online panel; 2015; Douhou, S.; Vis, C.
- Higher Item Nonresponse Rates Caused by Slider Scales in Web Surveys; 2015; Toepoel, V.; Funke, F.
- The effect of response formats on data quality and comparability across online PC and smartphone surveys...; 2015; Cleary, A.; Allum, N.; Kolbas, V.
- Mobile devices in a web panel: what are the results of adjusting questionnaires for smartphones and...; 2015; de Bruijne, M.; Wijnant, A.
- Online Eye-Tracking of Dynamic Advertising Content in (Mobile) Web-Surveys; 2015; Berger, S.
- Deep impact or no impact, evaluating opportunities for a new question type: Statement allocation on...; 2015; Schmidt, S.
- Approaches for Evaluating Online Survey Response Quality; 2015; Gluck, N.
- Coding Surveys on their Item Characteristics: Reliability Diagnostics; 2015; Bais, F.; Schouten, B.; Toepoel, V.
- Predicting Response Times in Web Surveys; 2015; Wenz, A.
- Positioning of Clarification Features in Open Frequency and Open Narrative Questions; 2015; Fuchs, M.; Metzler, A.
- The Role of Device Type and Respondent Characteristics in Internet Panel Survey Breakoff; 2015; McCutcheon, A. L.
- Web Survey Invitations: Design Features to Improve Response Rates; 2015; Hughes, J.; Marlar, J.
- Advance Postcard Mailing Improves Web Panel Survey Participation; 2015; Bertoni, N.; Burkey, A.; Caldaro, M.; Keeter, S.; DiSogra, C.; McGeeney, K.
- Mobile Devices for the Collection of Sensitive Information; 2015; Maitland, A.; Mercer, A. W.; Tourangeau, K.; Williams, Do.
- What Is The Impact of Smartphone Optimization on Long Surveys?; 2015; Cole, J.; Brooks, K.; Sarraf, S.
- Examining the Impact of Mobile First and Responsive Web Design on Desktop and Mobile Respondents; 2015; Tharp, D.
- Can An Importance Prompt Reduce Item Nonresponse For Demographic Items Across Web and Mail Modes?; 2015; Israel, G. D.
- Leveraging Area Probability Sampling in Recruiting Households for Web Surveys; 2015; Copeland, K.; Pedlow, K.; Tupek, A.
- Reducing Coverage Error in a Web Survey of College Students; 2015; Daley, K.; Pacer, J.
- Influences on Response Latency in a Web Survey; 2015; Ackermann, A.; Cheng, H. W.; Howard Ecklund, E.; Kolenikov, S.; Phillips, B. T.
- App vs. Web for Surveys of Smartphone Users; 2015; Igielnik, R.; McGeeney, K.
- Where Does the Platform Matter: The Impact of Geographic Clustering in Device Ownership and Internet...; 2015; Bilgen, I.; English, N.; Stern, M. J.; Ventura, I.