Web Survey Bibliography
Title Panel Online: how important is the recruitment mode ?
Year 2016
Access date 29.04.2016
Presentation PDF (1.02MB)
Abstract
Relevance & Research Question: Non probabilistic online panels are gaining more and more market shares. The 2 main factors are determining this success are the low cost and speed in the data collection. We focalized our research on the the way panellists were recruited: offline through CATI interview or online through banners and advertisements on facebook. Our main question is : Is there any difference between panelists recruited via CATI and panelists recruited online in terms of data quality ?
Methods & Data: For our research we used data collected using our own panel: Opinione.net. This panel was created on January 2011, during the first 4 years the panelists were recruited exclusively offline. In the last years we also started to recruit panelists online. At the time when we’ve carried out the surveys 6674 panelists were subscribed to our panel, 3632 recruited offline, 3042 recruited online. To assess our hypothesis we analysed the data collected by 5 different web surveys carried out on our panel.
To measure the data quality we’ve used several indicators (response time, number of DK, non differentiation index)
Results: Panelists recruited online are generally quicker than the ones recruited offline, in all 5 surveys the length of interview for the web recruited is shorter (significative difference) and 4 times out of 5 the panelists recruited via cati take 20% more time to complete the questionnaire.
Also the non differentiation index shows differences between two groups: panelists recruited via CATI give more differentiated responses (T test significative).
Panelists recruited online are generally younger, high percentage of women and housewives, while panelists recruited via CATI show a greater percentage of pensioners. Panelists recruited via web are more active (significantly higher number of clicked links/day ), have an higher percentage of 'Completed' and a lower percentage of 'Early Screen Out'.
Methods & Data: For our research we used data collected using our own panel: Opinione.net. This panel was created on January 2011, during the first 4 years the panelists were recruited exclusively offline. In the last years we also started to recruit panelists online. At the time when we’ve carried out the surveys 6674 panelists were subscribed to our panel, 3632 recruited offline, 3042 recruited online. To assess our hypothesis we analysed the data collected by 5 different web surveys carried out on our panel.
To measure the data quality we’ve used several indicators (response time, number of DK, non differentiation index)
Results: Panelists recruited online are generally quicker than the ones recruited offline, in all 5 surveys the length of interview for the web recruited is shorter (significative difference) and 4 times out of 5 the panelists recruited via cati take 20% more time to complete the questionnaire.
Also the non differentiation index shows differences between two groups: panelists recruited via CATI give more differentiated responses (T test significative).
Panelists recruited online are generally younger, high percentage of women and housewives, while panelists recruited via CATI show a greater percentage of pensioners. Panelists recruited via web are more active (significantly higher number of clicked links/day ), have an higher percentage of 'Completed' and a lower percentage of 'Early Screen Out'.
Access/Direct link Conference Homepage (presentation)
Year of publication2016
Bibliographic typeConferences, workshops, tutorials, presentations
Web survey bibliography (4086)
- Hidden Populations, Online Purposive Sampling, and External Validity: Taking off the Blindfold; 2015; Barrat, M. J.; Ferris, J. A.; Lenton, S.
- Improving Response to Household Surveys Using Mail Contact to Request Responses over the Internet: Results...; 2015; Dillman, D. A.
- The quality of data collected using online panels: a decade of research ; 2015; Callegaro, M.
- Sub-optimal Respondent Behavior and Data Quality in Online Surveys; 2015; Thomas, R. K.
- The role of gamification in better accessing reality and hence increasing data validity ; 2015; Bailey, P.; Kernohan, H.; Pritchard, G.
- Rewarding the Truth; 2015; Puleston, J.
- An experiment testing six formats of 101-point rating scales; 2015; Liu, M.; Conrad, F. G.
- Emerging Technologies: The Rise of Mobile Devices: From Smartphones to Smart Surveys; 2015; Buskirk, T. D.
- A Free Audio-CASI Module for LimeSurvey; 2015; Beier, H.; Schulz, S.
- Self-identification of occupation in web surveys: requirements for search trees and look-up tables ; 2015; Tijdens, K. G.
- Mode System Effects in an Online Panel Study: Comparing a Probability-based Online Panel with two Face...; 2015; Struminskaya, B.; De Leeuw, E. D.; Kaczmirek, L.
- Using Incentives and Multiple Modes of Data Collection to Improve Response Rate: Results from the National...; 2015; Howden, L. M.; Joestl, S. S.; Cohen, R. A.
- Utilizing iPads in the Field; 2015; Kiser, P.
- Mixed Mode Design Considerations; 2015; Hupp, A.
- Enhancing Response Usability in a Web-based Survey, But Did Anyone Use It?; 2015; Yoder, R.
- Mixed Mode Design Considerations: Panel Discussion; 2015; Smyth, J.; Hupp, A.; Elver, K.
- PayPal? An Incentive to Check-out?; 2015; Franklin, J.; Rasmussen, C.; Pruitt, J.; Waller, D.
- Standard Definitions: Final Dispositions of Case Codes and Outcome Rates for Surveys 2015; 2015
- Mixed mode surveys ; 2015; Burton, J.
- The Web Survey Revolution ; 2015; Murray, D.
- The Evolution of CAPI; 2015; Johnson, A. J.
- Online Questionnaire for Survey Research: Comparative Study of the Features Available with Free Account...; 2015; Subhash, K.
- Methodology of the RAND Mid-Term 2014 Election Panel; 2015; Carman, K. G; Pollack, S.
- An Experiment in Open End Response Length in Relation to Text Box Length in a Web Survey; 2015; Traugott, M. W.; Antoun, C.
- Item nonresponse in open-ended questions: Identification and reduction in web surveys; 2015; Kaczmirek, L.; Behr, D.
- Metrics and Design Tool for Building and Evaluating Probability-Based Online Panels; 2015; DiSogra, C.; Callegaro, M.
- 28 Questions to Help Buyers of Online Samples; 2015; Cape, P. J.; Phillips, A.; Baker, R.; Cooke, M.; Ribeiro, E.; Terhanian, G.
- Designing Bonsai Surveys: The small but perfectly formed survey experience to meet the needs of the...; 2015; Puleston, J.
- Ethical decision-making and Internet research 2.0: Recommendations from the AoIR ethics working committee...; 2015; Markham, A.; Buchanan, E. A.
- Impact of raising awareness of respondents on the measurement quality in a web survey; 2015; Revilla, M.
- Analysis of four recruitment methods for obtaining normative data through a Web-based questionnaire:...; 2015; Nolte, M. T.; Shauver, M. J.; Chung, K. C.
- Open narrative questions in PC and smartphones: is the device playing a role?; 2015; Revilla, M.; Ochoa, C.
- Gamification of Online Surveys: Design Process, Case Study, and Evaluation; 2015; Harms, J.; Biegler, S.; Wimmer, C.; Kappel, K.; Grechenig, T.
- Equivalency of Paper Versus Tablet Computer Survey Data; 2015; Ravert, R. D.; Gomez-Scott, J.; Donnellan, M. B.
- Higher response rates at the expense of validity? Consequences of the implementation of the ‘forced...; 2015; Decieux, J. P.; Mergener, A.; Neufang, K.; Sischka, P.
- Development and Validation of a Scale for Social Exhibitionism on the Internet (SEXI); 2015; Vetter, M.; Eib, C.; Hill-Kloss, S.; Wollscheid, P.; Hagemann, D.
- Comparison of self-administered survey questionnaire responses collected using mobile apps versus other...; 2015; Belisario, J. S. M.; Jamsek, J.; Huckvale, K.; O'Donoghue, J.; Morrison, C. P.; Car, J.
- Evaluating the Distorting Effects of Inattentive Responding and Social Desirability on Self-Report Scales...; 2015; McKibben, W. B.; Silvia, P. J.
- A quasi-experiment on effects of prepaid versus promised incentives on participation in a probability...; 2015; Schaurer, I.; Bosnjak, M.
- Surveys: Question Wording and Response Categories; 2015; Schaeffer, N. C.; Dykema, J.
- Doing online research involving university students with disabilities: Methodological issues; 2015; De Cesarei, A.; Baldaro, B.
- Understanding Society Innovation Panel Wave 7: Results from Methodological Experiments; 2015; Blom, A. G.; Burton, J.; Booker, C. L.; Cernat, A.; Fairbrother, M.; Jaeckle, A.; Kaminska, O.; Keusch...
- Response Effects of Prenotification, Prepaid Cash, Prepaid Vouchers, and Postpaid Vouchers: An Experimental...; 2015; van Veen, F.; Goeritz, A.; Sattler, S.
- Correcting for non-response bias in contingent valuation surveys concerning environmental non-market...; 2015; Bonnichsen, O.; Boye Olsen, S.
- Can we augment web responses with telephonic responses to a graduate destination survey?; 2015; du Toit, J.
- Email subject lines and response rates to invitations to participate in a web survey and a face-to-face...; 2015; Sappleton, N.; Lourenco, F.
- Comparison of Internet and interview survey modes when estimating willingness to pay using choice experiments...; 2015; Mjelde, J. W.; Kim, T. K.; Lee, C.-K.
- Exploring ethical issues associated with using online surveys in educational research; 2015; Roberts, L. D.; Allen, P. J.
- Data collection mode effect on feeling thermometer questions: A comparison of face-to-face and Web surveys...; 2015; Liu, M., Wang, Yi.
- Do Attempts to Improve Respondent Attention Increase Social Desirability Bias?; 2015; Clifford, S.; Jerit, J.