The application of online surveys for workplace health research

Journal of The Royal Society for the Promotion of Health

Volumn 123, Issue 2, 2003, Pages 95-101

  Scriven, Angela ^a   Smith Ferrier, Sandra ^a  

^a BRUNEL UNIVERSITY   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Health research; Internet research; Online data collection; Online surveys; Survey research; Workplace research

Indexed keywords

COMPUTER SECURITY; CONFIDENTIALITY; E-MAIL; ELECTRONICS; HEALTH BEHAVIOR; HEALTH CARE COST; HEALTH PROMOTION; HEALTH SURVEY; HUMAN; INFORMATION PROCESSING; INTERNET; MEDICAL RESEARCH; OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH; ONLINE SYSTEM; QUESTIONNAIRE; REVIEW; SELF DISCLOSURE; SOCIAL DESIRABILITY; WORK; WORK ENVIRONMENT; WORKPLACE;

EID: 0038141152     PISSN: 14664240     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/146642400312300213     Document Type: Review

References (33)

1. Daykin N, Doyal L. Health and Work: Critical Perspectives. Basingstoke: Macmillan, 1999
2. Bailey KD. Methods in Social Science. New York: Free Press, 1994
3. Kuhnert K, McCauley DP. Applying alternative survey methods. In: Kraut AI, editor. Organizational Surveys: Tools for Assessment and Change. San Francisco, CA: Jossey Bass, 1996
4. Buchanan T, Smith JL. Using the internet for psychological research: Personality testing on the World Wide Web. Br J Psychol 1999;90:125-44
5. Schaefer D, Dillman D. Development of a standard e-mail methodology: Results of an experiment. Public Opinion Quarterly 1998;62(3):378-97
6. Mehta R, Sivadas E. Comparing response rates and response content in mail versus electronic mail surveys. J Market Res Soc 1995;37(4):429-39
7. Tse A. Comparing the response rate, response speed and response quality of two methods of sending questionnaires: e-mail vs. mail. J Market Res Soc 1998;40(4):353-61
8. Sheehan KB, Hoy MG. Using e-mail to survey internet users in the United States: Methodology and assessment. J Computer Mediated Comm 1999 4(3). Available online at: www.ascusc.org/jcmc/vol4/issue3/sheehan.html (cited 15 December 2002)
9. Watt J. Using the internet for quantitative survey research. Quirk's Market Res Rev 1997; Article No. 0248. Available online at: www.quirks.com/articles/article.asp?arg_ArticleID=24 8 (cited 2002 December 15)
10. Dommeyer C, Moriarty E. Comparing two forms of an e-mail survey: Embedded vs. attached. J Market Res Soc 1999;42(1):39-50
11. Bachmann D, Elfrink J, Vazzana G. Tracking the progress of e-mail vs. snail-mail. Market Res 1996;8(2):31-5
12. Tse ACB, Tse KC, Yin CH, Ting CB. Comparing two methods of sending out questionnaires: E-mail versus mail. J Market Res Soc 1995;37(4):441-6
13. Couper MP, Blair J, Triplett T. A comparison of mail and e-mail for a survey of employees in federal statistical agencies. J Official Statistics 1999;15(1):39-56
14. Sheehan K. E-mail survey response rates: A review. J Computer Mediated Comm 2001;16(2). Available online at: www.ascusc.org/jcmc/vol6/issue2/sheehan.html (cited 15 December 2002)
15. Sheehan KB, McMillan S. Response variation in e-mail surveys: An exploration. J Advertis Res 1999;39(4):45-54
16. Shannon DM, Johnson TE, Searcy S, Lott A. Using electronic surveys: Advice from survey professionals. Practical Assess Res Evaluat 2001;8(1). Available online at: www.ericae.net/pare/getvn.asp?v=8&n=1 (cited 15 December 2002)
17. Kiesler S, Sproull L. Response effects in the electronic survey. Public Opinion Quarterly 1986;50:402-13
18. Weisband S, Kiesler S. Self disclosure on computers forms: Meta-analysis and implications. University of Arizona, Tucson, Arizona. Available online at: uainfo.arizona.edu/~weisband/chi/chi96.html (cited 15 December 2002)
19. Lucas RW, Mullin PJ, Luna CB, McInroy DC. Psychiatrists and a computer as interrogators of patients with alcohol-related illnesses: A comparison. Br J Psychiatry 1977;131:160-7.
20. Booth-Kewley S, Edwards JE, Rosenfeld P. Impression management, social desirability, and computer administration of attitude questionnaires: Does the computer make a difference? J App Psychol 1992;77(4):562-6
21. Lautenschlager GJ, Flaherty VL. Computer administration of questions: More desirable or more socially desirable. J App Psychol 1990;75(3):310-4.
22. Potosky D, Bobko P. Computer versus paper-and-pencil administration mode and response distortion in noncognitive selection tests. J App Psychol 1997;82(2):293-9
23. Davis R. Web-based administration of a personality questionnaire: Comparison with traditional methods. Beh Res Methods Instrum Computers 1999;31(4):572-7.
24. Joinson A. Social desirability, anonymity, and Internet-based questionnaires. Beh Res Methods Instrum Computers 1999;31(3):433-8
25. Manfreda K, Vehovar V, Batagelji Z. Web versus mail questionnaire for an Institutional Survey. In: Westlake A, editor. Challenge of the Internet. London: Association for Survey Computing, 2001
26. Klassen R, Jacobs J. Experimental comparison of Web, electronic and mail survey technologies in operations management. J Operations Manage 2001;19(6):713-28.
27. Dillman D, Tortora R, Conradt J, Bowker D. Influence of plain vs. fancy design on response rates for web surveys. Presented at Joint Statistical Meetings, Dallas, Texas, August 1998. Available online at: survey.sesrc.wsu.edu/dillman/papers/asa98ppr.pdf (cited 15 December 2002)
28. Dillman DA, Christenson JA, Carpenter EH, Brooks R. Increasing mail questionnaire response: A four state comparison. Am Social Rev 1974;39:744-56
29. Heberlein TA, Baumgartner R. Factors affecting response rates to mailed surveys: A quantitative analysis of the published literature. Am Sociolog Rev 1978;43:447-62
30. NUA. How many online? Available online at: www.nua.com/surveys/how_many_online/index.html (cited 15 December 2002)
31. Schmidt WC. World wide web surveys research: Benefits, potential problems, and solutions. Beh Res Methods Instrum Computers 1997;29(2):274-9
32. GVU Center. GVU's 10th WWW User Survey Team. GVU's 10th WWW user survey. General Demographics Summary, October 1998. www.gvu.gatech.edu/user_surveys/survey-1998-10/reports/1998-10-General.doc (cited 15 December 2002)
33. Stanton JM, Rogelberg SG. Using Internet/Intranet web pages to collect organizational research data. Organ Res Methods 2001;4(3):200-16