Mode differences between face-to-face and web surveys: An experimental investigation of data quality and social desirability effects

International Journal of Public Opinion Research

Volumn 21, Issue 1, 2009, Pages 111-121

  Heerwegh, Dirk ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF LEUVEN   (Belgium)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 67650838437     PISSN: 09542892     EISSN: 14716909     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1093/ijpor/edn054     Document Type: Article

References (29)

1. AAPOR. (2004). Standard definitions: final dispositions of case codes and outcome rates for surveys (3rd ed.) Lenexa, Kansas: AAPOR.
2. Biemer, P. P. (2001). Nonresponse bias and measurement bias in a comparison of face to face and telephone interviewing. Journal of Official Statistics, 2, 295-320.
3. Billiet, J. B., & McClendon, M. J. (2000). Modeling acquiescence in measurement models for two balanced sets of items. Structural Equation Modeling, 7, 608-628.
4. Cialdini, R. B. (1984). Influence. How and why people agree to things. New York: William Morrow and Company.
5. Corritore, C. L., Kracher, B., & Wiedenbeck, S. (2003). On-line trust: Concepts, evolving themes, a model. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 58, 737-758.
6. Couper, M. P., Traugott, M. W., & Lamias, M. J. (2001). Web survey design and administration. Public Opinion Quarterly, 65, 230-253.
7. De Leeuw, E. D. (1992). Data quality in mail, telephone, and face to face surveys. Amsterdam: TT-Publikaties.
8. De Leeuw, E. D. (2005). To mix or not to mix data collection modes in surveys. Journal of Official Statistics, 21, 233-255.
9. DeRouvray, C., & Couper, M. P. (2002). Designing a strategy for reducing "no opinion" responses in web-based surveys. Social Science Computer Review, 20, 3-9.
10. Dillman, D. A. (1991). The design and administration of mail surveys. Annual Review of Sociology, 17, 225-249.
11. Dillman, D. A. (2000). Mail and Internet surveys: The tailored design method. New York: John Wiley.
12. Dillman, D. A., & Bowker, D. K. (2001). The Web questionnaire challenge to survey methodologists. In U.-D. Reips & M. Bosnjak (Eds.), Dimensions of Internet science (pp. 159-178). Lengerich: Pabst Science Publishers.
13. Groves, R. M. (1989). Survey errors and survey costs. New York: Wiley.
14. Groves, R. M., & Couper, M. P. (1998). Nonresponse in household interview surveys. New York: Wiley.
15. Heerwegh, D., & Loosveldt, G. (in press). Face-to-face versus web surveying in a high Internet coverage population: Differences in response quality. Public Opinion Quarterly.
16. Holbrook, A. L., Green, M. C., & Krosnick, J. A. (2003). Telephone versus face-to-face interviewing of national probability samples with long questionnaires: Comparisons of respondent satisficing and social desirability response bias. Public Opinion Quarterly, 67, 79-125.
17. Joinson, A. N. (2001). Knowing me, knowing you: Reciprocal self-disclosure in Internet-based surveys. CyberPsychology & Behavior, 4, 587-591.
18. Krosnick, J. A. (1991). Response strategies for coping with the cognitive demands of attitude measures in surveys. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 5, 213-236.
19. McCarty, J. A., & Shrum, L. J. (2000). The measurement of personal values in survey research: A test of alternative rating procedures. Public Opinion Quarterly, 64, 271-298.
20. Newman, J. C., Des Jarlais, D. C., Turner, C. F., Gribble, J., Cooley, P., & Paone, D. (2002). The differential effects of face-to-face and computer interview modes. American Journal of Public Health, 92, 294-297.
21. Peytchev, A. A. (2007). Participation decisions and measurement error in Web surveys. Ann Arbor: The University of Michigan.
22. Sidanius, J., Pratto, F., & Mitchell, M. (1994). In-group identification, social dominance orientation, and differential intergroup social allocation. Journal of Social Psychology, 134, 151-167.
23. Tarnai, J., & Dillman, D. A. (1992). Questionnaire context as a source of response differences in mail and telephone surveys. In N. Schwarz & S. Sudman (Eds.), Context effects in social and psychological research (pp. 115-129). New York: Springer.
24. Toepoel, V., Das, M., & Van Soest, A. (2005). Design of Web questionnaires: A test for number of items per screen. Tilburg: CentER, Tilburg University.
25. Tourangeau, R., Couper, M. P., & Conrad, F. (2004). Spacing, position, and order. Interpretive heuristics for visual features of survey questions. Public Opinion Quarterly, 68, 368-393.
26. Tourangeau, R., Couper, M. P., & Steiger, D. M. (2003). Humanizing self- administered surveys: Experiments on social presence in Web and IVR surveys. Computers in Human Behavior, 19, 1-24.
27. Tourangeau, R., Rips, L. J., & Rasinski, K. A. (2000). The psychology of survey response. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
28. Tourangeau, R., & Yan, T. (2007). Sensitive questions in surveys. Psychological Bulletin, 133, 859-883.
29. Voogt, R. J. J., & Saris, W. E. (2005). Mixed mode designs: Finding the balance between nonresponse bias and mode effects. Journal of Official Statistics, 21, 367-387.