Web Survey Bibliography
Title Using scantron versus an audience response system for survey research: Does methodology matter when measuring computer-mediated communication competence?
Author Bunz, U.
Source Computers in Human Behaviour, 21, 2, pp. 343-359
Year 2005
Database ScienceDirect
Access date 03.01.2005
Abstract The purpose of this study was to investigate whether results of the computer-mediated communication (CMC) competency scale differ depending on the survey instrument used. Data were collected from 173 undergraduate students (53% female; average age 20). Of these, 96 subjects completed the questionnaire using scantron sheets, while 77 subjects used an audience response system called Classroom Performance System (CPS). All subjects completed a second questionnaire using paper-and-pencil to evaluate their experience with either the scantron sheets or the CPS. t-Test results show that using the CPS is more fun for participants (p<.000); no more or less difficult (p=.806); and does not make a difference with regard to experienced time pressure (p=.425). Subjects have higher doubts about the validity of their recorded answers (p=.007) when using the CPS. Regression analysis shows that in two out of 12 constructs of the CMC competency scale, scoring was influenced by using a technological data collection method. The two constructs were "message factors" (p=.002) and "medium factors" (p=.002). Overall, results support the use of the CPS as an alternative to scantron sheets for measuring CMC competence.
Access/Direct link ScienceDirect (full text)
Year of publication2005
Bibliographic typeJournal article
Web survey bibliography - 2005 (76)
- The ethics of research using electronic mail discussion groups; 2005; Kralik, D., Warren, J., Koch, T., Pignone, G., Price, K.
- The Analyses of Domestic Study about Internet Survey; 2005; Rui, L., Tie-ying, S.
- Controlling the Baseline Speed of Respondents: An Empirical Evaluation of Data Treatment Methods of...; 2005; Mayerl, J.
- Determinanten der Rücklaufquote in Online-Panels; 2005; Batanic, B., Moser, K.
- On the cost-efficiency of probability sampling based mail surveys with a Web response option; 2005; Werner, P.
- Expert workshop on mixed mode data collection in comparative social surveys; 2005; Roberts, C.
- The Effect Of A Simultaneous Mixed-Mode (Mail And Web) Survey On Respondent Characteristics And Survey...; 2005; Brennan, M.
- The total survey error approach. A guide to the new science of survey research; 2005; Weisberg, H. F.
- The professional respondent problem in online panel surveys today; 2005; Fulgoni, G.
- Satisficing behavior in online panelists; 2005; Downes-Le Guin, T.
- Reading behavior in the digital environment: Changes in reading behavior over the past ten years; 2005; Liu, Z.
- Rating versus comparative trade-off measures. Trending changes in political issues across time and predictive...; 2005; Thomas, R. K., Behnke, S., Johnson, Al., Sanders, M.
- Publication bias: Recognizing the problem, understanding its origins and scope, and preventing harm; 2005; Dickersin, K.
- Panel proliferation and quality concerns; 2005; Faasse, J.
- Gricean effects in self-administered survey. Ph.D. Dissertation; 2005; Yan, T.
- Drop-down boxes, radio buttons, or fill-in-the-blank? Web survey scale-type effects; 2005
- Does weighting for nonresponse increase the variance of survey means?; 2005; Little, R. J., Vartivarian, S.
- Big scale observations gathered with the help of client side paradata; 2005; Haraldsen, G., Kleven, O., Sundvoll, A.
- User Interface Design and Evaluation ; 2005; Stone, D., Jarrett, C., Woodroffe, M., Minocha, S.
- Adding Value to Data Through Improved Access. The Case for Web Portals; 2005; Baker, R. P.
- Multi-Mode Research and Data Linkage. Theoretical and Practical Advice; 2005; Terhanian, G.
- Architectural Design of a Survey Questionnaire and Respondent Data Repository. Practical Considerations...; 2005; Cookson, P., Sobell, J.
- Developing and validating a nursing website evaluation questionnaire; 2005; Tsai, S. - L., Chai, S.-K.
- Workaround: Site’s surveys beat pop-up blockers, yield responses; 2005; Arnold, C.
- The Story of Subject Naught: A Cautionary but Optimistic Tale of Internet Survey Research; 2005; Konstan, J. A., Ross, M. W., Rosser, B. R. S., Stanton, J. M., Edwards, W. M.
- Standards in Online Surveys. Sources for Professional Codes of Conduct, Ethical Guidelines and Quality...; 2005; Kaczmirek, L., Schulze, N.
- Computer adaptive testing; 2005; Gershon, R. C.
- Ego control and ego-resiliency: Generalization of self-report scales based on personality descriptions...; 2005; Block, J., Funder, D. C., Letzring, T. D.
- The Web experiment list: A Web service for the recruitment of participants and archiving of Internet...; 2005; Reips, U. -D., Lengler, R.
- Survey of substance use among high school students in Taipei: Web-based questionnaire versus paper-and...; 2005; Wang, Y. C., Lee, C. M., Lew-Ting, C. Y., Hsiao, C. K., Chen, W. J.
- Web Surveys. A Brief Guide on Usability and Implementation Issues; 2005; Kaczmirek, L.
- An assessment of measurement invariance between online and mail surveys ; 2005; Deutskens, E., de Ruyter, K., Wetzels, M.
- E-mail versus Web survey response rates among health education professionals; 2005; Kittleson, M. J., Brown, S. L.
- Toward An Open-Source Methodology: What We Can Learn From The Blogosphere; 2005; M.
- Aux Abonnes Absents: Liste Rouge Et Telephone Portable Dans Les Enquetes En Population Generale Sur...; 2005; Beck, F., ., Peretti-Watel, P.
- Web Versus Paper Questionnares: A Design and Functionality - Comparison; 2005; Jones, Ja., Fraser, C., Dowling, Z.
- Web Surveys and the new Disability Discrimination Act; 2005; Macer, T.
- Mixed-mode Surveys Using Mail and Web Questionnaires; 2005; Meckel, M., Baugh, P., Walters, D.
- Sampling procedure, questionnaire design, online implementation; 2005; Jackob, N., Arens, J., Zerback, T., Jowell, R., de Rouvray, C.
- Simple Approaches to Estimating the Variance of the Propensity Score Weighted Estimator Applied on Volunteer...; 2005; Isaksson, A., Lee, S., de Rouvray, C.
- Simple Approaches to Estimating the Variance of the Propensity Score Weighted Estimator Applied on Volunteer...; 2005; Isaksson, A., Lee, S.
- Alternative Modes for Health Surveillance Surveys: An Experiment with Web, Mail, and Telephone; 2005; Link, M. W., Mokdad, A.
- An Experimental Comparison Of Web And Telephone Surveys; 2005; Fricker, S., Galesic, M., Tourangeau, R., Yan, T.
- Organizational Virtual Communities: Exploring Motivations Behind Online Panel Participation; 2005; Daugherty, T., Lee, W.-N., Gangadharbatla, H., Kim, K., Outhavong, S.
- Promoting Uniform Question Understanding in Today's and Tomorrow's Surveys; 2005; Conrad, F. G., Schober, M. F.
- Is a Web survey as effective as a mail survey? A field experiment among computer users; 2005; Kiernan, N. E., Kiernan, M., Oyler, M. A., Gilles, C.
- The effect of personalization on response rates and data quality in web surveys; 2005; Heerwegh, D., Vanhove, T., Matthijs, K., Loosveldt, G.
- When Methodology Interferes With Substance; 2005; Schoen, H., Faas, T.
- Web-based and Mailed Questionnaires: A Comparison of Response Rates and Compliance; 2005; Baelter, K., Balter, O., Fondell, E., Trolle-Lagerros, Y.
- Bleeding Edge or Proven Technology? The Fact and the Fiction of Mobile Survey Computing; 2005; Cameron, M. R.