Abstract
This chapter examines a number of issues related to online survey research designed to access populations of various stakeholders in the health care system, including patients, caregivers, and providers. Specifically, the chapter focuses on such issues as finding an adequate sampling frame for obtaining samples of online populations, measurement issues, enhancing response rates, overseeing web-based survey data collection, and data analysis issues. Moreover, it examines issues such as measurement validity and reliability in web-based surveys as well as problems with selection biases and generalizability of study findings. Finally, the chapter assesses the pros and cons of using SurveyMonkey and Qualtrics as web-survey platforms/services and their utility for studying various online contexts that may be of interest to social science and health scholars.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Bosnjak M, Tuten TL. Classifying response behaviors in web-based surveys. J Comput Mediated Commun. 2001;6. Retrieved from http://www.ascusc.org/jcmc/vol6/issue3/boznjak.html.
Cook C, Heath F, Thompson R. A meta-analysis of response rates in web or internet based surveys. Educ Psychol Meas. 2000;60:821–36.
Couper MP. Designing effective web surveys. New York: Cambridge University Press; 2008.
Curtis BL. Social networking and online recruiting for HIV research: ethical challenges. J Empir Res Hum Res Ethics. 2014;9(1):58–70.
Denissen JJ, Neumann L, van Zalk M. How the internet is changing the implementation of traditional research methods, people’s daily lives, and the way in which developmental scientists conduct research. Int J Behav Dev. 2010;34(6):564–75.
Dillman DA. Mail and internet surveys: the tailored design method. New York: Wiley; 2000.
Evans JR, Mathur A. The value of online surveys. Internet Res. 2005;15(2):195–219.
Eysenbach G, Wyatt J. Using the internet for surveys and health research. J Med Internet Res. 2002;4(2):e13.
Fan W, Yan Z. Factors affecting response rates of the websurvey: a systematic review. Comput Hum Behav. 2010;26:132–9.
Galesic M, Bosnjak M. Effects of questionnaire length on participation and indicators of response quality in a web survey. Public Opin Q. 2009;73(2):349–60.
Greenlaw C, Brown-Welty S. A comparison of web-based and paper-based survey methods: testing assumptions of survey mode and response cost. Eval Rev. 2009;33(5):464–80.
Johnson JA. Ascertaining the validity of individual protocols from web-based personality inventories. J Res Pers. 2005;39(1):103–29.
Kaplowitz MD, Hadlock TD, Levine R. A comparison of web and mail survey response rates. Public Opin Q. 2004;68(1):94–101.
Konstan JA, Simon Rosser BR, Ross MW, Stanton J, Edwards WM. The story of subject naught: a cautionary but optimistic tale of internet survey research. J Comput Mediated Commun. 2005;10(2):Article 11. http://jcmc.indiana/edu/vol10/issue2/konstan.html.
Kramer J, Rubin A, Coster W, Helmuth E, Hermos J, Rosenbloom D, … Brief D. Strategies to address participant misrepresentation for eligibility in web-based research. Int J Methods Psychiatr Res. 2014;23(1):120–29.
Lieberman DZ. Evaluation of the stability and validity of participant samples recruited over the internet. Cyberpsychol Behav Soc Netw. 2008;11(6):743–5.
Manfreda KL, Bosnjak M, Berzelak J, Haas I, Vehovar V, Berzelak N. Web surveys versus other survey modes: a meta-analysis comparing response rates. J Mark Res Soc. 2008;50(1):79.
Murray E, Khadjesari Z, White IR, Kalaitzaki E, Godfrey C, McCambridge J, Thompson SG, Wallace P. Methodological challenges in online trials. J Med Internet Res. 2009;11(2):e9. https://doi.org/10.2196/jmir.1052.
Owen DJ, Fang MLE. Information-seeking behavior in complementary and alternative medicine (CAM): an online survey of faculty at a health sciences campus. J Med Libr Assoc. 2003;91(3): 311.
Payne J, Barnfather N. Online data collection in developing nations: an investigation into sample bias in a sample of South African university students. Soc Sci Comput Rev. 2012;30(3):389–97.
Pedersen ER, Helmuth ED, Marshall GN, Schell TL, PunKay M, Kurz J. Using Facebook to recruit young adult veterans: online mental health research. JMIR Res Protocol. 2015;4(2):e63.
Porter SR, Whitcomb ME. The impact of contact type on web survey response rates. Public Opin Q. 2003;67(4):579–88.
Pullmann H, Allik J, Realo A. Global self-esteem across the life span: a cross-sectional comparison between representative and self-selected internet samples. Exp Aging Res. 2009;35:20–44.
Riper H, Spek V, Boon B, Conijn B, Kramer J, Martin-Abello K, Smit F. Effectiveness of e-self-help interventions for curbing adult problem drinking: a meta-analysis. J Med Internet Res. 2011;13(2):e24. https://doi.org/10.2196/jmir.1691.
Shaw LH, Gant LM. In defense of the internet: the relationship between internet communication and depression, loneliness, self-esteem, and perceived social support. Cyberpsychol Behav. 2002;5(2):157–71.
Shih TH, Fan X. Comparing response rates from web and mail surveys: a meta-analysis. Field Methods. 2008;20(3):249–71.
Siegel MB, Tanwar KL, Wood KS. Electronic cigarettes as a smoking-cessation tool: results from an online survey. Am J Prev Med. 2011;40(4):472–5.
Simon Rosser BR, Gurak L, Horvath KJ, Michael Oakes J, Konstan J, Danilenko GP. The challenges of ensuring participant consent in internet-based sex studies: a case study of the men’s INTernet sex (MINTS-I and II) studies. J Comput-Mediat Commun. 2009;14(3):602–26.
Valkenburg PM, Peter J. Social consequences of the internet for adolescents. Curr Dir Psychol Sci. 2009;18:1–5.
van Ingen EJ, Wright KB. Predictors of mobilizing online coping versus offline coping resources after negative life events. Comput Hum Behav. 2016;59:431–9.
Wilson PM, Petticrew M, Calnan M, Nazareth I. Effects of a financial incentive on health researchers’ response to an online survey: a randomized controlled trial. J Med Internet Res. 2010;12(2):e13.
Wright KB. Perceptions of on-line support providers: an examination of perceived homophily, source credibility, communication and social support within on-line support groups. Commun Q. 2000;48:44–59.
Wright KB. Researching internet-based populations: advantages and disadvantages of online survey research, online questionnaire authoring software packages, and web survey services. J Comput Mediat Commun. 2005;10:Article 11. Retrieved from http://jcmc.indiana.edu/vol10/issue3/wright.html.
Wright KB. A communication competence approach to healthcare worker conflict, job stress, job burnout, and job satisfaction. J Healthc Qual. 2011;33:7–14.
Wright KB, Miller CH. A measure of weak tie/strong tie support network preference. Commun Monogr. 2010;77:502–20.
Wright KB, Banas JA, Bessarabova E, Bernard DR. A communication competence approach to examining health care social support, stress, and job burnout. Health Commun. 2010a;25(4): 375–82.
Wright KB, Rains S, Banas J. Weak tie support network preference and perceived life stress among participants in health-related, computer-mediated support groups. J Comput-Mediat Commun. 2010b;15:606–24.
Wright KB, Rains S. Weak tie support preference and preferred coping style as predictors of perceived credibility within health-related computer-mediated support groups. Health Commun. 2013;29:281–287.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2019 Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd.
About this entry
Cite this entry
Wright, K.B. (2019). Web-Based Survey Methodology. In: Liamputtong, P. (eds) Handbook of Research Methods in Health Social Sciences. Springer, Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-10-5251-4_18
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-10-5251-4_18
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Singapore
Print ISBN: 978-981-10-5250-7
Online ISBN: 978-981-10-5251-4
eBook Packages: Social SciencesReference Module Humanities and Social SciencesReference Module Business, Economics and Social Sciences