Comparability of data gathered from evaluation questionnaires on paper and through the internet

Research in Higher Education

Volumn 46, Issue 5, 2005, Pages 571-591

  Leung, Doris Y P ^a   Kember, David ^a  

^a CHINESE UNIVERSITY OF HONG KONG   (Hong Kong)

Author keywords

College student surveys; Internet surveys; Response bias; Teaching evaluation; Web surveys

Indexed keywords

EID: 21444455850     PISSN: 03610365     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s11162-005-3365-3     Document Type: Article

References (31)

1. Carini, R. M., Hayek, J. C., Kuh, G. D., Kennedy, J. M., and Ouimet, J. A. (2003). College student responses to web and paper surveys: Does mode matter?. Research in Higher Education 44(1): 1-19.
2. Chou, C. P., Bentler, P. M., and Satorra, A. (1991). Scaled test statistics and robust standard errors for nonnormal data in covariance structure analysis: A Monte Carlo study. British Journal of Mathematical and Statistical Psychology 44: 347-357.
3. Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioural sciences, (2nd ed). Lawrence Earlbaum, Hillsdale, NJ.
4. Couper, M. P. (2000). Web surveys: A review of issues and approaches. Public Opinion Quarterly 64: 464-494.
5. Cronk, B. C., and West, J. L. (2002). Personality research on the Internet: A comparison of Web-based and traditional instruments in take-home and in-class settings. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, & Computers 34(2): 177-180.
6. Dillman, D. A. (2000). Mail and Internet Surveys: The Tailor Design Method, (2nd ed). John Wiley and Sons, New York.
7. Feldt, L. S., Woodruff, D. J., and Salih, F. A. (1987). Statistical inference for coefficient α. Applied Psychological Measurement 11(1): 93-103.
8. Furse, D. H., Stewart, D. W., and Rados, D. L. (1981). Effect of foot-in-the-door, cash incentives, and follow-ups on survey responses. Journal of Marketing Research 18: 473-478.
9. Hancock, D. R., and Flowers, C. P. (2000). Social desirability responding on world wide web and paper-administrated surveys. Paper Presented at the National Convention of the Association for Educational Communications and Technology, Denver, OC.
10. Henly, S. J. (1993). Robustness of some estimators for the analysis of covariance structures. British Journal of Mathematical and Statistical Psychology 46: 313-338.
11. Hu, L.-T., Bentler, P. M., and Kano, Y. (1992). Can test statistics in covariance structure analysis be trusted?. Psychological Bulletin 112: 351-362.
12. Kember, D., and Leung, D. Y. P. (2005). The influence of active learning experiences on the development of graduate capabilities. Studies in Higher Education. 30(2): 157-172.
13. Kember, D., and Leung, D. Y. P. The impact of the teaching and learning environment on the development of generic capabilities. (Submitted for publication).
14. Kuh, G. D. (2001). Assessing what really matters to student learning: Inside the National Survey of Student Engagement. Change 33(3): 10-17, 66.
15. Layne, B. H., DeCristoforo, J. R., and McGinty, D. (1999). Electronic versus traditional student ratings of instruction. Research in Higher Education 40: 221-232.
16. Little, T. D. (1997). Mean and covariance structures (MACS) analyses of cross-cultural data: Practical and theoretical issues. Multivariate Behavioral Research 32(1): 53-76.
17. Moss, J., and Hendry, G. (2002). Use of electronic surveys in course evaluation. British Journal of Educational Technology 33(5): 583-592.
18. Olsen, D. R., Wygant, S. A., and Brown B. L. (1999). Entering the next millennium with web-based assessment: Considerations of efficiency and reliability. Paper Presented at the Conference of the Rocky Mountain Association for Institutional Research, Las Vegas, NV.
19. Rindskopf, F. (1984). Using phantom and imaginary latent variables to parameterize constraints in linear structural models. Psychometrika 49: 37-47.
20. Rosenthal, R., Rosnow, R., and Rubin, D. B. (2000). Contrasts and Effect Sizes in Behavioral Research: A Correlation Approach, Cambridge University Press, New York.
21. Sax, L. J., Gilmartin, S. K., and Bryant, A. N. (2003). Assessing response rates and non-response bias in web and paper surveys. Research in Higher Education, 44(4): 409-431.
22. Solomon, D. J. (2001). Conducting web-based surveys Practical Assessment. Research and Evaluation 7: 19-23.
23. Steenkamp, J. E . M., and Baumgartner, H. (1998). Assessing measurement invariance in crossnational consumer research. Journal of Consumer Research 25: 78-90.
24. Tomsic, M. L., Hendel, D. D., and Matross, R. P. (2000). A World Wide Web response to student satisfaction surveys: Comparisons using paper and Internet formats. Paper Presented at the Annual Meeting of the Association for Institutional Research, Cincinnati.
25. Van de Vijver, F. J. R., and Harsveld, M. (1994). The incomplete equivalence of the paper-and-pencil and computerized versions of the general aptitude test battery. Journal of Applied Psychology 79(6): 852-859.
26. Vandenberg, R. J., and Lance, C. E. (2000). A review and synthesis of the measurement invariance literature: Suggestions, practices, and recommendations for organizational research. Organizational Research Methods 3(1): 4-70.
27. Vispoel, W. P. (2000). Computerized versus paper-and-pencil assessment of self-concept: Score comparability and respondent preferences. Measurement and Evaluation in Counseling and Development 33: 130-143.
28. Vispoel, W. P., Boo, J., and Blieiler, T. (2001). Computerized and paper-and-pencil versions of the Rosenberg self-esteem scale: A comparison of psychometric features and respondent preferences. Educational & Psychological Measurement 61(3): 461-474.
29. Woodruff, D. J., and Feldt, L. S. (1986). Tests for equality of several alpha coefficients when their sample estimates are dependent. Psychometrika 51(3): 393-413.
30. Yun, G. W., and Trumbo, G. W. (2000). Comparative response to a survey executed by post, email, and web form. Journal of Computer Mediated Communication 6(1).
31. Zusman, B. J., and Duby, P. B. (1984). An evaluation of the use of token monetary incentives in enhancing the utility of postsecondary survey research techniques. Paper Presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, New Orleans, LA.