Toward an effective understanding of website users: Advantages and pitfalls of linking transaction log analyses and online surveys

D-Lib Magazine

Volumn 13, Issue 3-4, 2007, Pages

  Harley, Diane ^a   Henke, Jonathan ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 33947146510     PISSN: None     EISSN: 10829873     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1045/march2007-harley     Document Type: Review

References (18)

1. Baruch, Yehuda. 1999. Response Rate in Academic Studies: A Comparative Analysis. Human Relations 52(4): 421-438 (April). Available at 〈http://lium.sagepub.com/cgi/reprint/52/4/421〉.
2. Bishop, Ann Peterson. 1998. Measuring Access, Use, and Success in Digital Libraries. The Journal of Electronic Publishing 4(2). Available at 〈http://www.press.umich.edu/jep/04-02/bishop.html〉.
3. Bosnjak, Michael, and Tracy L. Tuten. 2001. Classifying Response Behaviors in Web-based Surveys. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication (JCMC) 6(3) (April). Available at 〈http://icmc.indiana.edu/vol6/ issue3/bozniak.html〉.
4. Carson, Stephen E. 2004. MIT Opencourseware Program Evaluation Findings Report. Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, Mass. Available at 〈http://ocw.mit.edu/OcwWeb/Global/AboutOCW/evaluation. htm〉.
5. Chambers, Ray L., and Chris J. Skinner. 2003. Analysis of Survey Data. Chichester, England: Wiley.
6. Evans, Joel, and Anil Mathur. 2005. The value of online surveys. Internet Research 15(2): 195-219.
7. Faas, Thorsten. 2004. Online or Not Online? A Comparison of Offline and Online Surveys Conducted in the Context of 2002 German Federal Election. Bulletin de Méthodologie Sociologique 82: 42-57.
8. Fowler, Floyd J. 2002. Survey research methods. Thousand Oaks, Calif.: Sage Publications.
9. Fricker, Ronald D., and Matthias Schonlau. 2002. Advantages and Disadvantages of Internet Research Surveys: Evidence From the Literature. Field Methods 14(4): 347-367 (November 1). Available at 〈http://fmx.sagepub.com/cgi/reprint/14/4/347.pdf〉.
10. Gunn, Holly. 2002. Web-based Surveys: Changing the Survey Process. First Monday 7(12) (December). Available at 〈http://www. firstmonday.org/issues/issue7 12/gunn/〉.
11. Harley, Diane, Jonathan Henke, Shannon Lawrence, Ian Miller, Irene Perciali, and David Nasatir. 2006. Use and Users of Digital Resources: A Focus on Undergraduate Education in the Humanities and Social Sciences. University of California, Berkeley. Available at: 〈http://cshe.berkeley. edu/research/digitalresourcestudy/report/〉.
12. Harley, Diane. 2007. Why Study Users? An Environmental Scan of Use and Users of Digital Resources in Humanities and Social Sciences Undergraduate Education. First Monday, volume 12, number 1 (January 2007) Available at 〈http://firstmonday.org/issues/issue12_1/harley/index.html〉.
13. Johnson, Timothy, and Linda Owens. 2003. Survey Response Rate Reporting in the Professional Literature. Paper presented at Annual Conference of the American Association for Public Opinion Research, Nashville, Tenn., May 15.
14. Mento, Barbara, and Brendan Rapple. 2003. Data Mining and Data Warehousing. Association of Research Libraries, Washington, D.C. Available at 〈http://www.arl.org/bm~doc/spec274webbook.pdf〉.
15. Rossi, Peter H., James D. Wright, and Andy B. Anderson, eds. 1983. Handbook of Survey Research. New York: Academic Press.
16. Schonlau, Matthias, Ronald D. Fricker, and Marc N. Elliott. 2002. Conducting research surveys via e-mail and the web. Santa Monica, Calif.: Rand. Available at 〈 http://www.rand.org/publications/MR/MR1480/〉.
17. Steel, Robert George Douglas, and James H. Torrie. 1980. Principals and Procedures of Statistics: A Biometrical Approach. New York: McGraw-Hill.
18. Troll Covey, Denise. 2002. Usage and Usability Assessment: Library Practices and Concerns. Digital Library Federation and Council on Library and Information Resources (CLIR), Washington, D.C. Available at 〈http://www.clir.org/pubs/reports/pub105/contents.html〉.