Web Survey Bibliography
Title Push2web or less is more? Experimental evidence from a mixed-mode population survey at the community level in Germany
Author Neumann, R.; Haeder, M.; Brust, O.; Dittrich, E.; von Hermanni, H.
Year 2017
Access date 08.09.2017
Abstract The ‘Tailored design’ method (Dillmann et al. 2014) does not just seek to improve response rates, but also to alleviate the resulting non-response bias. Offering a tailored response option for respondents also provides the additional benefit of a substantial reduction of survey costs, considering the cost differential between an online and a paper responses. Yet, offering the web option implicitly relies on the assumption of equal and complete access to the internet and corresponding skill sets among respondents. Millar & Dillman (2014), who “conducted two experiments within a population that has complete access to the Internet and is believed to be highly Web literate” (Millar & Dillman 2014: 2) therefore covered only a (still) special case and found that offering both response option may not be a first best choice to achieve higher response rates. Do these results hold for samples of the general population as well?
To gain insights on this question, we systematically varied the postal recruitment process of a large mixed-mode survey we conducted in the fall of 2016 in the federal state of Saxony in Germany. We applied a sequential design similar to Millar & Dillman (2014) for the invitation of 8000 citizens to a community survey on waste disposal and environmental behavior. In the first invitation wave, we randomly allocated 40% of the respondents to paper-only survey, another 20% to a web-only and the final 40% to mixed-mode design with both response options. The follow-up consisted of a ‘Thank You’-postcard after about two weeks and a second invitation wave (completely) in mixed-mode design, offering both response options. We will present results of the competing designs on the overall response as well as a non-response analysis, based on register characteristics.
To gain insights on this question, we systematically varied the postal recruitment process of a large mixed-mode survey we conducted in the fall of 2016 in the federal state of Saxony in Germany. We applied a sequential design similar to Millar & Dillman (2014) for the invitation of 8000 citizens to a community survey on waste disposal and environmental behavior. In the first invitation wave, we randomly allocated 40% of the respondents to paper-only survey, another 20% to a web-only and the final 40% to mixed-mode design with both response options. The follow-up consisted of a ‘Thank You’-postcard after about two weeks and a second invitation wave (completely) in mixed-mode design, offering both response options. We will present results of the competing designs on the overall response as well as a non-response analysis, based on register characteristics.
Access/Direct link Conference Homepage (abstract) / (presentation)
Year of publication2017
Bibliographic typeConferences, workshops, tutorials, presentations
Web survey bibliography (1211)
- Using experts’ consensus (the Delphi method) to evaluate weighting techniques in web surveys not...; 2017; Toepoel, V.; Emerson, H.
- Mind the Mode: Differences in Paper vs. Web-Based Survey Modes Among Women With Cancer; 2017; Hagan, T. L.; Belcher, S. M.; Donovan, H. S.
- Ideal and maximum length for a web survey; 2017; Revilla, M.; Ochoa, C.
- Effects of sampling procedure on data quality in a web survey; 2017; Rimac, I.; Ogresta, J.
- Fieldwork monitoring and managing with time-related paradata; 2017; Vandenplas, C.
- Interviewer effects on onliner and offliner participation in the German Internet Panel; 2017; Herzing, J. M. E.; Blom, A. G.; Meuleman, B.
- Nonresponses as context-sensitive response behaviour of participants in online-surveys and their relevance...; 2017; Wetzlehuetter, D.
- Push2web or less is more? Experimental evidence from a mixed-mode population survey at the community...; 2017; Neumann, R.; Haeder, M.; Brust, O.; Dittrich, E.; von Hermanni, H.
- The perils of non-probability sampling; 2017; Bethlehem, J.
- Targeted letters: Effects on sample composition and item non-response; 2017; Bianchi, A.; Biffignandi, S.
- Web Health Monitoring Survey: A New Approach to Enhance the Effectiveness of Telemedicine Systems; 2017; Romano, M. F.; Sardella, M. V.; Alboni, F.
- Device and Internet Use among Spanish-dominant Hispanics: Implications for Web Survey Design and Testing...; 2017; Trejo, Y. A. G.; Schoua-Glusberg, A.
- Data collection mode differences between national face-to-face and web surveys on gender inequality...; 2017; Liu, M.
- A test of sample matching using a pseudo-web sample; 2017; Chatrchi, G., Gambino, J.
- PC, phone or tablet? Use, preference and completion rates for web surveys ; 2017; Brosnan, K.; Gruen, B.; Dolnicar, S.
- Web survey experiments on matrix questions; 2017; Liu, M.
- Overview: Online Surveys; 2017; Vehovar, V.; Lozar Manfreda, K.
- Respondent mode choice in a smartphone survey ; 2017; Conrad, F. G., Schober, M. F., Antoun, C., Yan, H. Y., Hupp, A., Johnston, M., Ehlen, P., Vickers, L...
- Methodological Aspects of Central Left-Right Scale Placement in a Cross-national Perspective; 2016; Scholz, E.; Zuell, C.
- Standard Definitions: Final Dispositions of Case Codes and Outcome Rates for Surveys 2016; 2016
- Using Visual Analogue Scales in eHealth: Non-Response Effects in a Lifestyle Intervention; 2016; Kuhlmann, T.; Reips, U.-D.; Wienert, J.; Lippke, S.
- Are Initial Respondents Different from the Nonresponse Follow-Up Cases? A Study of Probability-Based...; 2016; Zeng, W.; Dennis, J. M.
- Predicting and Preventing Break-Offs in Web Surveys; 2016; Mittereder, F.
- Design of Sample Surveys That Complement Observational Data to Achieve Population Coverage; 2016; Slud, E.; Ashmead, R.
- Standard Definitions Final Dispositions of Case Codes and Outcome Rates for Surveys; 2016
- Du kommst hier nicht rein: Türsteherfragen identifizieren nachlässige Teilnehmer in Online-Umfragen; 2016; Merkle, B.; Kaczmirek, L.; Hellwig, O.
- Population Survey Features and Response Rates: A Randomized Experiment; 2016; Guo, Y.; Kopec, J.; Cibere, J.; Li, L. C.; Goldsmith, C. H.
- Mode Effect and Response Rate Issues in Mixed-Mode Survey Research: Implications for Recreational Fisheries...; 2016; Wallen, K. E.; Landon, A. C.; Kyle, G. T.; Schuett, M. A.; Leitz, J.; Kurzawski, K.
- Geht’s auch mit der Maus? – Eine Methodenstudie zu Online-Befragungen in der Jugendforschung...; 2016; Heim, R.; Konowalczyk, S.; Grgic, M.; Seyda, M.; Burrmann, U.; Rauschenbach, T.
- FocusVision 2015 Annual MR Technology Report; 2016; Macer, T., Wilson, S.
- Can Student Populations in Developing Countries Be Reached by Online Surveys? The Case of the National...; 2016; Langer, A., Meuleman, B., Oshodi, A.-G. T., Schroyens, M.
- Comparing Cognitive Interviewing and Online Probing: Do They Find Similar Results?; 2016; Meitinger, K., Behr, D.
- The impact of survey duration on completion rates among Millennial respondents ; 2016; Coates, D.; Bliss, M.; Vivar, X.
- How to maximize survey response rates ; 2016; DeVall, R.; Colby, C.
- Participation rates of childhood cancer survivors to self-administered questionnaires: a systematic...; 2016; Kilsdonk, E.; Wendel, E.; van Dulmen-den Broeder, E.; van Leeuwen, F.E.; Van Den Berg, M. H.; Jaspers...
- The use of online social networks as a promotional tool for self-administered internet surveys; 2016; de Rada, V. D.; Arino, L. V. C; Blasco, M. G
- The Effects of Pictorial vs. Verbal Examples on Survey Responses ; 2016; Sun, H.; Bertling, J.; Almonte, D.
- Grids and Online Surveys: Do More Complex Grids Induce Survey Satisficing? Evidence from the Gallup...; 2016; Wang, Me.; McCutcheon, A. L.
- The Effect of Emphasizing the Web Option in a Mixed-mode Establishment Survey ; 2016; O'Brien, J.; Rajapaksa, S.; Schafer, B.; Langetieg, P.
- Effect of Clarifying Instructions on Response to Numerical Open-ended Questions in Self-administered...; 2016; Kumar Chaudhary, A.; Israel, G. D.
- Beyond the Survey: Improving Data Insights and User Experience with Mobile Devices ; 2016; Graham, P.; Lew, G.
- User Experience Considerations for Contextual Product Surveys on Smartphones ; 2016; Sedley, A.; Mueller, H.
- The Differential Effect of Mobile-friendly Surveys on Data Quality; 2016; Horwitz, R.
- Assessing Changes in Coverage Bias of Web Surveys a s Internet Access Increases in the United States...; 2016; Sterrett, D.; Malato, D.; Benz, J.; Tompson, T.; English, N.
- Timing is Everything: Discretely Discouraging Mobile Survey Response through the Timing of Email Contacts...; 2016; Richards, A.; C.; Shook-Sa, B. E.; C.; Berzofsky, M.; Smith, A. C.
- Patterns of Unit and Item Nonresponse in a Multinational Web Survey ; 2016; Ackermann, A.; Howard Ecklund, E.; Phillips, B. T.; Brulia, A.
- A Closer Look at Response Time Outliers in Online S urveys Using Paradata Survey Focus ; 2016; Schlosser, S.; Hoehne, J. K.
- Response Order Effects on a Web Survey of Nurse Pra ctitioners ; 2016; Quintana, G.; Riley, L. E.
- Assessing the Effects and Effectiveness of Attention-check Questions in Web Surveys: Evidence From a...; 2016; Vannette, D.
- Effects of an Initial Offering of Multiple Survey Response Options on Response Rates; 2016; Steele, E. A.; Marlar, J.; Allen, L.; Kanitkar, K. N.