Notice: the WebSM website has not been updated since the beginning of 2018.

Web Survey Bibliography

Title Web Survey Design: Comparing Static and Interactive Survey Instruments
Year 2003
Access date 07.05.2004
Abstract

Web-based survey instruments are becoming more and more popular among survey researchers. While the web did not take over the industry as the primary medium for surveys as it was predicted by some, it is accepted as a useful tool to study certain populations such as those with a high rate of internet penetration and/or listed email addresses. Unfortunately, this recent emergence of web-based surveys has only been accompanied by very little research – academic or otherwise – on the effects of web survey design. Even the very little literature we have on web survey methodology is divided in most of its findings. One of these ambiguous design controversies is whether researchers should use interactive or static web forms for their surveys. The main difference between the two is that the static design presents the entire survey on a single web page while the interactive proceeds question by question with each question residing on a page of its own. One study, conducted in 1999, found that about ninety percent of all the questionnaires on the web are static surveys – electronic versions of traditional paper and pencil surveys. Today, however, the industry standard seems to be the interactive web design, which most of the big commercial online survey companies use. Both designs have pros and cons ranging from the ease of use of the instrument to providing context for the respondent. Our study tests assumptions about the relative merits of both forms. Using fresh data and an experimental design, we build upon research we conducted in the past in the area of web survey design.

Access/Direct link

Homepage - conference (abstract)

Year of publication2003
Bibliographic typeConferences, workshops, tutorials, presentations
Print

Web survey bibliography - The American Association for Public Opinion Research (AAPOR) 58th Annual Conference, 2003 (20)