Web Survey Bibliography
Title The Effect of Mobile Web Survey Design on Screen Orientation Manipulation
Author Young, R.H.; Crawford, S. D.; Couper, M. P.; Nelson, T. F.
Year 2014
Access date 16.08.2016
Presentation PDF (1,33 MB)
Abstract
Respondents are using mobile devices to complete web surveys whether we want them to or not. Because most web surveys are designed for larger screens, data quality may suffer, though little evidence exists to demonstrate whether or not this is the case. With on-board accelerometers, mobile devices can capture paradata to give us insight into respondent behavior.
To better evaluate whether specific web survey design features cause respondents to change how they hold their device we captured screen orientation, among other paradata. The assumption is that if the respondent rotates the device, it is to better view the survey. Capturing this information on a page-by-page basis throughout a survey provided sufficient data to understand if an orientation change (and change back) may have resulted from particular designs -- such as grid formatted questions.
We captured this paradata over multiple waves (of varying questionnaire length) to a college student survey fielded between mid-2013 and early 2014. While the survey was initially designed for larger screens, elements of mobile optimization were included for respondents accessing from a smartphone. In initially comparing optimized versus non-optimized designs, we see a significantly higher rate of respondents using landscape orientation on the non-optimized survey (approx. 20%) versus those on the optimized surveys (approx. 1%).
We will describe the respondent experience across multiple survey implementations, and we will discuss our hypotheses and further unveil the data that we have collected. Where possible, we will evaluate the data provided for quality (item missing data, breakoff, etc.) and will include device type and other interrelated variables in our analyses.
To better evaluate whether specific web survey design features cause respondents to change how they hold their device we captured screen orientation, among other paradata. The assumption is that if the respondent rotates the device, it is to better view the survey. Capturing this information on a page-by-page basis throughout a survey provided sufficient data to understand if an orientation change (and change back) may have resulted from particular designs -- such as grid formatted questions.
We captured this paradata over multiple waves (of varying questionnaire length) to a college student survey fielded between mid-2013 and early 2014. While the survey was initially designed for larger screens, elements of mobile optimization were included for respondents accessing from a smartphone. In initially comparing optimized versus non-optimized designs, we see a significantly higher rate of respondents using landscape orientation on the non-optimized survey (approx. 20%) versus those on the optimized surveys (approx. 1%).
We will describe the respondent experience across multiple survey implementations, and we will discuss our hypotheses and further unveil the data that we have collected. Where possible, we will evaluate the data provided for quality (item missing data, breakoff, etc.) and will include device type and other interrelated variables in our analyses.
Access/Direct link Conference Homepage (abstract) / (full tex)
Year of publication2014
Bibliographic typeConferences, workshops, tutorials, presentations
Web survey bibliography (4086)
- Methodological Considerations in the Use of Name Generators and Interpreters; 2015; Proeschold Bell, R. J.; Eagle, D. E.
- Item Nonresponse in a Mixed-Mode Household Travel Survey; 2015; Pena, R. J.; Wilbur, M.; Kolenikov, S.
- Survey Estimation: How Different Are Probability and Non-Probability Survey Designs?; 2015; Shook-Sa, B. E.; Dever, J. A.
- Experience of Multiple Approaches to Increase Response Rate in a Mixed-Mode Implementation of a Population...; 2015; Ding, M.;Leite-Bennett, A. K.; Landreman, U. E.; Johnson, D. R.; Mehrotra, K.; Rosenkranz, M.; Thompson...
- The Effect of Respondent Commitment on Response Quality in an Online Survey; 2015; Cibelli Hibben, K.; Conrad, F.
- Predictors of Completion Rates in Online Surveys; 2015; Cho, S.; Cohen, Jo.; Kuriakose, N.; Liu, M.
- Boosting Probability-Based Web Survey Response Rates via Nonresponse Follow-Up; 2015; Chew, K.; Fontes, A.; Lavrakas, P. J.
- Adding a Web Mode to Phone Surveys: Effectiveness and Cost Implications; 2015; Beebe, T. J.; Lien, R.; Luxenberg, H.; Rainey, J.
- Web Survey Response Examined from the Perspective of Leverage-Saliency Theory Within a Longitudinal...; 2015; Nares, Y. G.
- Challenging Survey Screen Designs on Smartphones; 2015; Nichols, E. M.; Olmsted, E. L.
- The Effect Usability Testing has on Data Quality: A Design of an Online Diary; 2015; Gentry, R. J.; Pens, Y.
- Making Usability-Testing a Standard Survey Pretesting Methodology; 2015; McFarlane, E.
- Measuring the Effects of Operational Designs on Response Rates and Nonresponse Bias; 2015; Anderson, Me.; Henrikson, N.; King, D.; Ulrich, K.
- U.S. Survey Research: Sampling; 2015
- A Systematic Generation of an Email Pool for Web Surveys; 2015; Silber, H.; Leibold, J.; Lischewski, J.; Schlosser, S.
- Are Tailored Outreach Efforts Too Costly? An Assessment of a Responsive Design Approach to Control Costs...; 2015; Epps, S. R.; Getman, D. P.; Hall, L. M.; Hunter, J. A.
- Nonresponse Analysis and Adjustment in the Follow- Up Study of a National Cohort of Gulf War And Gulf...; 2015; Dursa, E.; Hammer, H.; Kolenikov, S.; Schneiderman, A. I.
- Return To Sender: An Evaluation of Undeliverable (e)Mail in the Modern Age; 2015; Marlar, J.; Yu, D.
- Evaluating Visual Design Elements for Data Collection and Panelist Engagement; 2015; Christian, L. M.; Harm, D.; Langer Tesfaye, C.; Wells, T.
- Comparing Field and Laboratory Usability Tests to Assess the Consistency and Mistakes in Web Survey...; 2015; Croen, A.; Gonzales, N.; Ghandour, R.; Stern, M. J.
- Cell RDD Respondents Unmasked: Progress Report on Geo and Demo Appends to the Wireless Frame; 2015; DiSogra, C.; Kennedy, C.Mosher, M.
- Venue-Based and Real-Time Sampling Methodologies in an Intercept Survey of Cyclists; 2015; Iachan, R.; Driscoll, H.; Saucier, O.
- Cognitive Testing of Survey Translations: Does Respondent Language Proficiency Matter?; 2015; Schoua-Glusberg, A.; Park, H.; Meyer, M.; Goerman, P. L.; Sha, M.
- Culturally-Related Response Styles for Attitude Questions: A Comparative Analysis of Chinese and American...; 2015; Wang, Me.
- Innovative Uses of Paradata Across Diverse Contexts ; 2015; Cheung, G.; Pennell, B.-E.
- Identifying and correcting question-wording problems: the case of Wageindicator; 2015; Slavec, A., Vehovar, V., Tijdens, K. G.
- Mail survey abroad with an alternative web survey; 2015; de Rada, V. D., Domínguez-Álvarez, J. A.
- Does the use of mobile devices (tablets and smartphones) affect survey quality and choice behaviour...; 2015; Liebe, U., Glenk, K., Oehlmann, M., Meyerhoff, J.
- The Effects of the Direction of Rating Scales on Survey Responses in a Telephone Survey; 2015; Keusch, F., Yan, T.
- Web-based survey, calibration, and economic impact assessment of spending in nature based recreation; 2015; Paudel, K. P., Devkota, N., Gyawali, B.
- Predictors of inconsistent responding in web surveys; 2015; Akbulut, Y.
- The Prostate Cancer Journey Results of an Online Survey of Men and Their Partners; 2015; O'Shaughnessy, P. K., Laws, T. A., Esterman, A.
- Twelve-month prevalence and predictors of self-reported suicidal ideation and suicide attempt among...; 2015; Kang, E. H., Kim, G. M., Hyun, M. K., Choi, S. M., Kim, J. M., Woo, J. M.
- Association between first airborne cedar pollen level peak and pollinosis symptom onset: a web-based...; 2015; Bando, H., Sugiura, H., Ohkusa, Y., Akahane, M., Sano, T., Jojima, N., Okabe, N., Imamura, T.
- A Mixed-Methods Investigation of Factors and Scenarios Influencing College Students’ Decision...; 2015; Koskey, K. L. K.; Cain, B.; Alvim, H. G.; Slager, E. M.
- Selection error in single- and mixed mode surveys of the Dutch general population; 2015; Hox, J., Klausch, L. T., Schouten, B.
- Online Administration of a Quantified Self-Questionnaire for Elderly People: A User Satisfaction Survey...; 2015; Beauchet, O., Vilcocq-Merjagnan, C.
- Nannies' Knowledge, Attitude, and Management of Food Allergies of Children: An Online Survey; 2015; Greiwe, J. C., Pazheri, F., Schroer, B.
- A web-based survey of United Kingdom sedation practice in the intensive care unit; 2015; Yassin, S. M., Yassin, J., Terblanche, M., McKenzie, C. A.
- Does Opinion Leadership Increase the Followers on Twitter; 2015; Hwang, Y.
- e-Social Science Perspective on Survey Process: Towards an Integrated Web Questionnaire Development...; 2015; Vehovar, V., Petrovcic, A., Slavec, A.
- The Impact of Mixing Modes on Reliability in Longitudinal Studies; 2014; Cernat, A.
- Growing Beyond the Phone Tree; 2014; Hayzlett, J.
- A Comparison of Different Online Sampling Approaches for Generating National Samples; 2014; Heen, M. S. J., Lieberman, J. D., Miethe, T. D.
- Does Sequence Matter in Multimode Surveys: Results from an Experiment; 2014; Wagner, J., Arrieta, J., Guyer, H., Ofstedal, M. B.
- The Use of Cognitive Interviewing Methods to Evaluate Mode Effects in Survey Questions; 2014; Gray, M., Blake, M., Campanelli, P.
- A Mixed Methods Approach to Network Data Collection; 2014; Rice, E., Holloway, I. W., Barman-Adhikari, A., Fuentes, D., Brown, C. H., Palinkas, L. A.
- Infliential Factors on Survey Outcomes: Length of Survey, Device Selection and Extrnal Elements; 2014; Ribeiro, E.
- The Effect of Mobile Web Survey Design on Screen Orientation Manipulation; 2014; Young, R.H.; Crawford, S. D.; Couper, M. P.; Nelson, T. F.
- Investigating Response Quality in Mobile and Desktop Surveys: A Comparison of Radio Buttons, Visual...; 2014; Toepoel, V.; Funke, F.