首页> 外文OA文献 >Mode system effects in an online panel study: comparing a probability-based online panel with two face-to-face reference surveys
【2h】

Mode system effects in an online panel study: comparing a probability-based online panel with two face-to-face reference surveys

机译:在线小组研究中的模式系统效果:将基于概率的在线小组与两次面对面的参考调查进行比较

代理获取
本网站仅为用户提供外文OA文献查询和代理获取服务,本网站没有原文。下单后我们将采用程序或人工为您竭诚获取高质量的原文,但由于OA文献来源多样且变更频繁,仍可能出现获取不到、文献不完整或与标题不符等情况,如果获取不到我们将提供退款服务。请知悉。

摘要

"One of the methods for evaluating online panels in terms of data quality is comparing the estimates that the panels provide with benchmark sources. For probability-based online panels, high-quality surveys or government statistics can be used as references. If differences among the benchmark and the online panel estimates are found, these can have several causes. First, the question wordings can differ between the sources, which can lead to differences in measurement. Second, the reference and the online panel may not be comparable in terms of sample composition. Finally, since the reference estimates are usuallycollected face-to-face or by telephone, mode effects might be expected. In this article, weinvestigate mode system effects, an alternative to mode effects that does not focus solely on measurement differences between the modes, but also incorporates survey design features into the comparison. The data from a probability-based offline-recruited online panel is compared to the data from two face-to-face surveys with almost identical recruitment protocols. In the analysis, the distinction is made between factual and attitudinal questions. We report both effect sizes of the differences and significances. The results show that the online panel differs from face-to-face surveys in both attitudinal and factual measures. However, the reference surveys only differ in attitudinal measures and show no significant differences for factual questions. We attribute this to the instability of attitudes and thus show the importance of triangulation and using two surveys of the same mode for comparison." (author's abstract)
机译:“根据数据质量评估在线专家组的一种方法是将专家组提供的估计值与基准源进行比较。对于基于概率的在线专家组,可以使用高质量的调查或政府统计作为参考。找到基准和在线专家组估计,可能有多种原因:首先,问题的措辞可能在来源之间有所不同,这可能导致度量的差异;其次,参考和在线专家组在样本方面可能不具有可比性。最后,由于参考估计通常是通过面对面或通过电话收集的,因此可能会产生模式效应。在本文中,我们研究模式系统效应,这是一种模式效应的替代方法,它不仅仅关注模式之间的测量差异。 ,但也将调查设计功能纳入比较中,将基于概率的离线招聘在线小组的数据与d两次面对面的调查,他们的招聘协议几乎相同。在分析中,区分事实问题和态度问题。我们报告了差异的大小和意义。结果表明,在线小组在态度和事实措施上均不同于面对面调查。但是,参考调查仅在态度措施上有所不同,而在事实问题上则没有显着差异。我们将其归因于态度的不稳定,因此显示了三角剖分的重要性,并使用相同模式的两次调查进行比较。”(作者摘要)

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号