Selection bias in web surveys

International Statistical Review

Volumn 78, Issue 2, 2010, Pages 161-188

  Bethlehem, Jelke ^a  

^a STATISTICS NETHERLANDS   (Netherlands)

Author keywords

Adjustment weighting; Bias; Online survey; Reference survey; Self selection; Under coverage; Web survey

Indexed keywords

EID: 78651397423     PISSN: 03067734     EISSN: 17515823     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1751-5823.2010.00112.x     Document Type: Article

References (46)

1. Bethlehem, J.G. (1988). Reduction of the nonresponse bias through regression estimation. J. Official Statist., 4, 251-260.
2. Bethlehem, J.G. (2002). Weighting nonresponse adjustments based on auxiliary information. In Survey Nonresponse, Eds. R.M. Groves, D.A. Dillman, J.L. Eltinge & R.J.A. Little. New York: Wiley & Sons.
3. Bethlehem, J.G. (2007). Reducing the bias of web survey based estimates. Discussion paper 07001. Voorburg/Heerleen, The Netherlands: Statistics Netherlands.
4. Bethlehem, J.G. (2009a). Applied Survey Methods, A Statistical Perspective. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons.
5. Bethlehem, J.G. (2009b). The Rise of Survey Sampling. Discussion Paper 09015. The Hague/Heerlen, The Netherlands: Statistics Netherlands.
6. Börsch-Supan, A., Elsner,D., Faßbender, H.,Kiefer, R.,McFadden,D.&Winter, J. (2004). Correcting the Participation Bias in an Online Survey. Report. Munich, Germany: University of Munich.
7. Bowley, A.L. (1906). Address to the economic science and statistics section of the British association for the advancement of science. J. R. Stat. Soc., 69, 548-557.
8. Bowley, A.L. (1926). Measurement of the precision attained in sampling. Bull. Int. Statist. Inst., XII, Book 1, 6-62.
9. CBS (2008). ICT gebruik van huishoudens naar huishoudkenmerken. Statline. www.cbs.nl
10. Cobben, F. (2004). Nonresponse Correction Techniques in Household Surveys at Statistics Netherlands: a CAPICATI Comparison. Technical report, Voorburg, The Netherlands: Statistical Netherlands, Methods and Informatics Department.
11. Cochran, W.G. (1953) Sampling Techniques. New York: John Wiley & Sons.
12. Cochran,W.G. (1968). The effectiveness of adjustment by subclassification in removing bias in observational studies. Biometrics, 24, 205-213.
13. Cochran, W.G. (1977). Sampling Techniques, 3rd ed. New York: John Wiley & Sons.
14. Couper, M.P. (2000). Web surveys: A review of issues and approaches. Public Opinion Quarterly, 64, 464-494.
15. Couper, M.P. (2008). Designing Effective Web Surveys. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
16. Couper, M.P., Baker, R.P., Bethlehem, J.G., Clark, C.Z.F., Martin, J., Nicholls II, W.L. & O'Reilly, J.M. (Eds.) (1998). Computer Assisted Survey Information Collection. New York: Wiley & Sons.
17. De Haan, J.&Van 'tHof,C. (2006). Jaarboek ICT en Samenleving,DeDigitale Generatie. The Hague, The Netherlands: Netherlands Institute for Social Research/SCP.
18. De Leeuw, E.D. (2005). To mix or not to mix data collection modes in surveys. J. Official Statist., 21, 233-255.
19. Deming, W. E. (1950). Some Theory of Sampling. New York: John Wiley & Sons.
20. Dillman, D. A. & Bowker, D. (2001). The web questionnaire challenge to survey methodologists. In Dimensions of Internet Science, Eds. U.D. Reips & M. Bosnjak. Lengerich, Germany: Pabst Science Publishers, 159-178.
21. Dillman, D.A., Smyth, J.D. & Christian, L.M. (2008). Internet, Mail, and Mixed-Mode Surveys, The Tailored Design Method. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons.
22. Duffy, B., Smith, K., Terhanian, G. & Bremer, J. (2005). Comparing data from online and face-to-face surveys. Internat. J. Market Res., 47, 615-639.
23. Eurostat (2007). More than 40% of Households have Broadband Internet Access. Eurostat News Release 166/2007. Luxembourg: Eurostat.
24. Fricker, R. & Schonlau, M. (2002). Advantages and disadvantages of internet research surveys: Evidence from the literature. Field Meth., 15, 347-367.
25. Hansen, M.H., Hurvitz, W.N. & Madow, W.G. (1953). Survey Sampling Methods and Theory. New York: John Wiley & Sons.
26. Heerwegh, D. & Loosveldt, G. (2002). An Evaluation of the Effect of Response Formats on Data Quality in Web Surveys. In Proceedings of the Paper Presented at the International Conference on Improving Surveys, Copenhagen.
27. Horvitz, D.G. & D.J. Thompson (1952). A generalization of sampling without replacement from a finite universe. J. Amer. Statist. Assoc., 47, 663-685.
28. Kendall, M.G. (1960). Where shall the history of statistics begin? Biometrika, 47, 447-449..
29. Kiaer, A. N. (1895), Observations et Expériences Concernant des Dénombrements Représentatives. Bull. Internat. Statist. Inst., IX, Book 2, 176-183
30. Kiaer, A. N. (1997 reprint). Den Repr̈asentative Undersökelsesmetode. Christiania Videnskabsselskabets Skrifter. II. Historiskfilosofiske klasse, 4, 37-56.
31. Kish, L. (1967). Survey Sampling. New York: Wiley & Sons. Kruskal, W. & Mosteller, F. (1979a). Representative sampling, I: Non-scientific literature. Internat. Statist. Rev, 47, 13-24.
32. Kruskal, W. & Mosteller, F. (1979b). Representative sampling, II: Scientific literature. Excluding statistics. Internat. Statist. Rev., 47, 111-127.
33. Kruskal, W. & Mosteller, F. (1979c). Representative sampling, III: The current statistical literature. Internat. Statist. Rev., 47, 245-265.
34. Kuusela, V. (2003). Mobile phones and telephone survey methods. In Proceedings of the 4th ASC International Conference, Eds. R. Banks, J. Currall, J. Francis, L. Gerrard, R. Kahn, T. Macer, M. Rigg, E. Ross, S. Taylor & A. Westlake, pp. 317-327.
35. Chesham Bucks, UK: Association for Survey Computing (ASC). Little, R.J.A & Rubin, D.B. (2002). Statistical Analysis with Missing Data, 2nd ed. New York: John Wiley & Sons.
36. Neyman, J. (1934). On the two different aspects of the representative method: The method of stratified sampling and the method of purposive selection. J. R. Stat. Soc., 97, 558-625.
37. Rosenbaum, P.R. & Rubin, D.B. (1983). The central role of the propensity score in observational studies for causal effects. Biometrika, 70, 41-55.
38. Rosenbaum, P.R.&Rubin,D.B. (1984).Reducing bias in observational studies using subclassification on the propensity score. J. Amer. Statist. Assoc., 79, 516-524.
39. S̈arndal, C.E. & Lundström, S. (2005). Estimation in Surveys with Nonresponse. Chichester, UK: JohnWiley & Sons.
40. Scherpenzeel, A. (2008). An online panel as a platform for multi-disciplinary research. In Access Panels and Online Research, Panacea or Pitfall? Eds. I. Stoop & M. Wittenberg, pp. 101-106. Amsterdam: Aksant.
41. Scherpenzeel, A. & Bethlehem, J. (2010). How representative are online-panels? Problems of coverage and selection and possible solutions. In Social Research and the Internet: Advances in applied Methods and New Research Strategies. Eds. M. Das, P. Ester & L. Kaczmirek. New York: Routlegde Academic, in press.
42. Schonlau, M., Fricker, R.D. & Elliott, M.N. (2003). Conducting Research Surveys via E-mail and the Web. Santa Monica, CA: Rand Corporation.
43. Schonlau, M., Zapert, K., Payne Simon, L., Haynes Sanstad, K., Marcus, S., Adams, J. Kan, H., Turber, R. & Berry, S. (2004). A comparison between responses from propensity-weighted Web survey and an identical RDD survey. Social Science Comp. Rev., 22, 128-138.
44. Terhanian, G., Smith, R., Bremer, J. & Thomas, R.K. (2001). Exploiting analytical advances: Minimizing the biases associated with Internet-based surveys of non-random samples. ESOMAR Publication Services, 248, 247- 272.
45. Vonk, T., Van Ossenbruggen, R. & Willems, P. (2006). The effects of panel recruitment and management on research results, a study among 19 online panels. ESOMAR Publication Services, 317, 79-99.
46. Yates, F. (1949). Sampling Methods for Censuses and Surveys. London: Charles Griffin & Co.