Does visual appeal matter? effects of web survey aesthetics on survey quality

Survey Research Methods

Volumn 4, Issue 1, 2010, Pages 45-59

  Mahon Haft, Taj Alexander ^a   Dillman, Don A ^a  

^a WASHINGTON STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Aesthetics; Emotional design; Screen design; Visceral reactions; Web survey

Indexed keywords

EID: 80054892778     PISSN: None     EISSN: 18643361     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Article

References (59)

1. Bernard, M., Chaparro, B. S., & Thomasson, R. (2000). Finding information on the Web: Does the amount of whitespace really matter? Usability News 2.2 [Online]. Retrieved from www.usabilitynews/2W/whitespace.htm.
2. Bernard, M., Liao, C., & Mills, M. (2001). Determining the best online font for older adults. Usability News 3.1 [Online]. Retrieved from www.usabilitynews/3W/fontSR.htm.
3. Bornstein, R. F. (1992). Subliminal mere exposure e ects. In R. F. Bornstein & T. S. Pittman (Eds.), Perception without awareness: Cognitive, clinical, and social perspectives (p. 191-255). London Press: The Guilford Press.
4. Bowker, D., & Dillman, D. A. (2001). An Experimental Evaluation of Left and Right Oriented Screens for Web Questionnaires. 2000 Proceedings of American Association for Public Opinion Research, American Statistical Association, Alexandria, VA.
5. Brady, L., & Phillips, C. (2003). Aesthetics and usability: a look at colour and balance. Usability News 5.2 [Online] retrieved from www.usabilitynews/51/aesthetics.htm.
6. Chaparro, B. S., Shaikh, A. D., & Baker, J. R. (2005). Reading Online Text with a Poor Layout: Is Performance Worse? Usability News 7.1 [Online] retrieved from www.usabilitynews/71/page setting.htm.
7. Christian, L., & Dillman, D. A. (2004). The Influence of Symbolic and Graphical Language Manipulations on Answers to Paper Self-Administered Questionnaires. Public Opinion Quarterly, 68(1), 57-80.
8. Coates, D. (2004). Online Surveys: Does One Size Fit All? Paper presented at RC33 6th International Conference on Social Methodology: Recent Developments and Applications in Social Research Methodology.
9. Couper, M. P. (2008). Designing Efective Web Surveys. New York: Cambridge University Press.
10. Couper, M. P., & Miller, P. V. (2008). Web Survey Methods Introduction. Public Opinion Quarterly, 72(5), 831-835.
11. Couper, M. P., Traugott, M., & Lamias, M. (2001). Web Survey Design and Administration. Public Opinion Quarterly, 65, 230-254.
12. Cuthbert, B. N., Schupp, H. T., Bradley, M. M., Birbaumer, N., & Lang, P. J. (2000). Brain potentials in affective picture processing: covariation with autonomic arousal and affective report. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Association for Public Opinion Research, Montreal, Quebec.
13. Damasio, A. R. (2000). A second chance for emotion. In R. D. Lane & L. Nadel (Eds.), Cognitive Neuroscience of Emotions. New York: Oxford University Press.
14. Dillman, D. A. (2007). Mail and Internet Surveys: The Tailored Design (2nd ed.). New York: John Wiley.
15. Dillman, D. A., & Christian, L. M. (2005). Survey Mode as a Source of Instability Across Surveys. Field Methods, 17(1), 30-52.
16. Dillman, D. A., Gertseva, A., & Mahon-Haft, T. (2005). Achieving Usability in Establishment Surveys Through the Application of Visual Design Principles. Journal of Official Statistics, 21(2), 183-214.
17. Dillman, D. A., Tortora, R. D., & Bowker, D. (1998). Principles for the Construction of Web Questionnaires. Technical Report 98-50 of the Social and Economic Sciences Research Center, Washington State University, Pullman, Washington.
18. Draper, S. W. (1999). Analysing fun as a candidate software requirement. PersonalTechnology, 3, 1-6.
19. Fricker, S., Galesic, M., Tourangeau, R., & Yan, T. (2005). An Experimental Comparison of Web and Telephone Surveys. Public Opinion Quarterly, 69(3), 370-392.
20. Galesic, M. (2006). Dropouts on the Web: Effects of Interest and Burden Experienced During an Online Survey. Journal of Official Statistics, 22(2), 313-328.
21. Goleman, D. (1996). Emotional Intellegence: Why It Can Matter More Than IQ. London: Bloomsbury.
22. Groves, R. M., Singer, E., & Corning, A. (2000). Leverage-saliency theory of survey participation: Description and illustration. Public Opinion Quarterly, 64, 299-308.
23. Hassenzahl, M., Beu, A., & Burmeister, M. (2001). Engineering joy. IEEE Software, 18(1), 70-76.
24. Heerwegh, D. (2003). Explaining Response Latency and Changing Answers using Client Side Paradata from a Web Survey. Social Science Computer Review, 21, 360-373.
25. Jennings, M. (2000). Theory and models for creating engaging and immersive ecommerce Websites. Proceedings of the 2000 ACM SIGCPR Conference on Computer Personnel Research (New York: ACM Press), pp. 77-85.
26. Knutson, J. F. (1998). The Effect of the User Interface Design on Adoption of New Technology. Dissertation Abstracts International: Section B: The Science and Engineering 59(3), 1399.
27. Krosnick, J. A. (1991). Response Strategies for Coping with the Cognitive Demands of Attitude Measures in Surveys. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 5, 213-236.
28. Krosnick, J. A., & Alwin, D. F. (1987). An Evaluation of a Cognitive Theory of Response Order Effects in Survey Measurement. Public Opinion Quarterly, 51, 201-219.
29. Krosnick, J. A., Narayan, S., & Smith, W. R. (1996). Satisficing in Surveys: Initial Evidence. New Directions for Program Evaluation, 70(2), 29-44.
30. Kurosu, M., & Kashimara, K. (1995). Apparent usability vs. inherent usability. In Proceedings of the CHI 1995 conference companion on human factors in computing systems (pp. 292-293). New York: ACM.
31. Lauer, D. A., & Pentak, S. (2002). Chapter 5: balance. Design Basics. Australia: Wadsworth.
32. Ledoux, J. (1994). Cognitive-emotional interactions in the brain. In P. Ekman & R. J. Davidson (Eds.), The Nature of Emotion (p. 73-118). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
33. Ledoux, J. (1996). The Emotional Brain: The Mysterious Underpinnings of Emotional Life. New York: Simon & Schuster.
34. Lindgaard, G. (1999). Does emotional appeal determine perceived usability of web sites? Hawthorne: University of Technology, School of Information Technology.
35. Lindgaard, G. (2007). Aesthetics, Visual Appeal, Usability and User Satisfaction: What Do the User’s Eyes Tell the User’s Brain? Australian Journal of Emerging Technologies and Society, 5(1), 1-14.
36. Lindgaard, G., & Dudek, C. (2003). What is this evasive beast we call user satisfaction? Interacting with Computers, 15(3), 429-452.
37. Lindgaard, G., Dudek, G., Fernandes, G., & Brown, J. (2006). Attention web designers: You have 50 milliseconds to make a good first impression! Behaviour & Information Technology, 25, 115-126.
38. Mahlke, S. (2006). Studying user experience with digital audio players. Submitted to ICEC2006, 5th International Conference on Entertainment Computing, 20-22 September, Cambridge, UK.
39. Mynatt, C. R., Doherty, M. E., & Tweney, R. D. (1977). Quarterly journal of experimental psychology. Confirmation bias in a simulated research environment: An experimental study of scientific inference, 29, 85-95.
40. Niedenthal, P. H., Halberstadt, J. B., & Innes-Ker, A. H. (1999). Emotional response categorization. Psychological Review, 106, 337-361.
41. Norman, A. D. (2004). Emotional Design: Why We Love (Or Hate) Everyday Things. Cambridge, MA: Basic Books.
42. Novemsky, N., Dhar, R., Schwarz, N., & Simonson, I. (2004). The Effect of Preference Fluency on Consumer Decision Making. Working paper, Yale University Graduate School of Business.
43. Palmer, S. E. (1999). Vision science: Photons to phenomenology. Cambridge, MA: Bradford Books/MIT Press.
44. Peytchev, A., Couper, M. P., McCabe, S. E., & Crawford, S. D. (2006). Web Survey Design: Paging Versus Scrolling. Public Opinion Quarterly, 70(4), 596-607.
45. Pope, D., & Baker, R. (2005). Experiments in Color for Web-Based Surveys. Paper presented at 2005 FedCASIC Conference, Washington, D.C.
46. Reber, R., & Schwarz, N. (1999). Effects of perceptual fluency on judgments of truth. Consciousness and Cognition, 8, 338-342.
47. Singer, E. (2006). Introduction: nonresponse bias in household surveys. Public Opinion Quarterly, 70(5), 637-645.
48. Sleep, D., & Pulleston, J. (2008). Measuring the value of respondent engagement: Summary of research findings. London: Engage Research.
49. Spool, J. M., Scanlon, T., Schroeder, W., Snyder, C., & DeAngelo, T. (1997). Web Site Usability: A Designer’s Guide, User Interface Engineering. North Andover: MA.
50. Stern, M. J., & Dillman, D. A. (2006). Community Participation, Social Ties and Use of the Internet. City and Community, 5(4), 409-424.
51. Toepoel, V. (2008). A Closer Look at Web Questionnaire Design. Ph.D. dissertation. Universiteit van Tilburg, Netherlands.
52. Tourangeau, R., Couper, M. P., & Conrad, F. (2004). Spacing, position, and order: interpretive heuristcs for visual features of survey questions. Public Opinion Quarterly, 68(3), 368-393.
53. Tourangeau, R., Couper, M. P., & Conrad, F. (2007). Color, labels, and interpretive heuristics for response scales. Public Opinion Quarterly, 71(1), 91-111.
54. Tractinsky, N., Katz, A. S., & Ikar, D. (2000). What is beautiful is usable. Interacting with Computers, 13, 127-145.
55. Tullis, T. S. (1984). Predicting the Usability of Alphanumeric Displays. Ph.D. dissertation, Rice University, Texas.
56. van der Heijden, H. (2003). Factors influencing the usage of websites: The case of a generic portal in the Netherlands. Information and Management, 40, 541-549.
57. Weller, D. (2004). The Effects of Contrast and Density on Visual Web Search. Usability News 6.2 [Online]. Retrieved from http://psychology.wichita.edu/surl/usabilitynews/62/density.htm.
58. White, J. V. (1974). Editing by design. New York: Bowker Company.
59. Zajonc, R. (1980). Feeling and thinking: Preferences need no inferences. American Psychologist, 35(2), 151-175.