An Updated Protocol to Detect Invalid Entries in an Online Survey of Men Who Have Sex with Men (MSM): How Do Valid and Invalid Submissions Compare?

AIDS and Behavior

Volumn 19, Issue 10, 2015, Pages 1928-1937

  Grey, Jeremy A ^a   Konstan, Joseph ^b   Iantaffi, Alex ^c   Wilkerson, J Michael ^d   Galos, Dylan ^e   Rosser, B R Simon ^e  

^a EMORY UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b University of Minnesota   (United States)

^c UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA MEDICAL SCHOOL   (United States)

^d UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS   (United States)

^e UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA   (United States)

Author keywords

Bias; HIV; Questionnaires; Survey methods; Validity

Indexed keywords

ADULT; COMPARATIVE STUDY; EVALUATION STUDY; HIV INFECTIONS; HUMAN; INFORMATION PROCESSING; INTERNET; MALE; MALE HOMOSEXUALITY; MEASUREMENT ACCURACY; QUESTIONNAIRE; REPRODUCIBILITY; STATISTICAL BIAS; STATISTICS AND NUMERICAL DATA;

ADULT; BIAS (EPIDEMIOLOGY); DATA ACCURACY; DATA COLLECTION; HIV INFECTIONS; HOMOSEXUALITY, MALE; HUMANS; INTERNET; MALE; REPRODUCIBILITY OF RESULTS; SURVEYS AND QUESTIONNAIRES;

EID: 84941414244     PISSN: 10907165     EISSN: 15733254     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s10461-015-1033-y     Document Type: Article

References (26)

1. van Gelder MMHJ, Bretveld RW, Roeleveld N. Web-based questionnaires: the future in epidemiology? Am J Epidemiol. 2010;172(11):1292.
2. Bowen A. Internet sexuality research with rural men who have sex with men: can we recruit and retain them? J Sex Res. 2005;42(4):317–23.
3. Rosser BRS, Konstan J, Gurak L, et al. Recruiting high risk Latino MSM for Internet prevention research. STD/HIV Prevention and the Internet Conference. Washington; 2001.
4. Salyers Bull S, Lloyd L, Rietmeijer C, McFarlane M. Recruitment and retention of an online sample for an HIV prevention intervention targeting men who have sex with men: The Smart Sex Quest Project. AIDS Care. 2004;16(8):931–43.
5. Bockting WO, Miner MH, Robinson BE, et al. Use of the Internet to reach the US transgender population for HIV/STD prevention research. STD/HIV Prevention and the Internet Conference. Washington; 2003.
6. Rosser BRS. Capturing the social demographics of hidden sexual minorities: an Internet study of the transgender population in the United States. Sex Res Soc Policy. 2007;4(2):50–64. doi:10.1525/srsp.2007.4.2.50.
7. Duncan D. The general well-being of recreational drug users: a survey on the WWW. Int J Drug Policy. 2000;11(5):315–23.
8. Nicholson T. A survey of adult recreational drug use via the World Wide Web: the Drugnet Study. J Psychoact Drug. 1999;31(4):415–22.
9. Skitka LJ, Sargis EG. The Internet as psychological laboratory. Annu Rev Psychol. 2006;57:529–55.
10. Bowen AM, Daniel CM, Williams ML, Baird GL. Identifying multiple submissions in Internet research: preserving data integrity. AIDS Behav. 2008;12(6):964–73.
11. Gosling SD, Vazire S, Srivastava S, John OP. Should we trust Web-based studies? a comparative analysis of six preconceptions about Internet questionnaires. Am Psychol. 2004;59(2):93–104.
12. Konstan JA, Rosser BRS, Ross MW, Stanton J, Edwards WM. The story of subject naught: a cautionary but optimistic tale of Internet survey research. J Comput Mediat Commun. 2005;10(2):11.
13. Pequegnat W, Rosser BRS, Bowen AM, et al. Conducting Internet-based HIV/STD prevention survey research: considerations in design and evaluation. AIDS Behav. 2007;11(4):505–21.
14. Birnbaum MH. Human research and data collection via the Internet. Annu Rev Psychol. 2004;55:803–32.
15. Rosser BRS, Miner MH, Bockting WO, et al. HIV risk and the Internet: results of the Men’s Internet Study (MINTS). AIDS Behav. 2009;13(4):746–56.
16. Bauermeister JA, Pingel E, Zimmerman M, Couper M, Carballo-Diéguez A, Strecher VJ. Data quality in HIV/AIDS Web-based surveys: handling invalid and suspicious data. Field Methods. 2012;24(3):272–91.
17. Lundevall-Unger P, Tranvik T. IP addresses—just a number? Int J Law Inf Technol. 2011;19(1):53–73. doi:10.1093/ijlit/eaq013.
18. Chiasson MA, Parsons JT, Tesoriero JM, Carballo-Dieguez A, Hirshfield A, Remien RH. HIV behavioral research online. J Urban Health. 2006;83(1):73–85.
19. Nosek BA, Banaji MR, Greenwald AG. E-research: ethics, security, design, and control in psychological research on the Internet. J Soc Issue. 2002;58(1):161–76. doi:10.1111/1540-4560.00254.
20. Konstan JA, Rosser BRS, Horvath KJ, Gurak L, Edwards W. Protecting subject data privacy in Internet-based HIV/STI prevention survey research. In: Conrad FG, Schober MF, editors. Envisioning the survey interview of the future. John Wiley & Sons: New York; 2008. ISBN: 978-0-471-78627-6.
21. Im EO, Chee W. Issues in protection of human subjects in Internet research. Nurs Res. 2002;51(4):266.
22. Nosen E, Woody SR. Online surveys: effect of research design decision on rates of invalid participation and data credibility. Grad Stud J Psychol. 2008;10:3–14.
23. LimeSurvey Project Team, Schmitz C. LimeSurvey: an open source survey tool. LimeSurvey Project: Hamburg; 2011.
24. Couper MP. Technology trends in survey data collection. Soc Sci Comput Rev. 2005;23(4):486–501. doi:10.1177/0894439305278972.
25. Rosser BRS. Online HIV prevention and the Men’s Internet Study-II (MINT-II): a glimpse into the world of designing highly-interactive sexual health Internet-based interventions. Canada: World Congress for Sexology. Montreal; 2005.
26. StataCorp. Stata Statistical Software: Release 12. StataCorp LP: College Station; 2011.