IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/cup/polals/v11y2003i01p23-43_01.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Subject Acquisition for Web-Based Surveys

Author

Listed:
  • Alvarez, R. Michael
  • Sherman, Robert P.
  • VanBeselaere, Carla

Abstract

This article provides a basic report about subject recruitment processes for Web-based surveys. Using data from our ongoing Internet Survey of American Opinion project, two different recruitment techniques (banner advertisement and subscription campaigns) are compared. This comparison, together with a typology of Web-based surveys, provides insight into the validity and generalizability of Internet survey data. The results from this analysis show that, although Internet survey respondents differ demographically from the American population, the relationships among variables are similar across recruitment methods and match those implied by substantive theory. Thus, our research documents the basic methodology of subject acquisition for Web-based surveys, which, as we argue in our conclusion, may soon become the survey interview mode of choice for social scientists.

Suggested Citation

  • Alvarez, R. Michael & Sherman, Robert P. & VanBeselaere, Carla, 2003. "Subject Acquisition for Web-Based Surveys," Political Analysis, Cambridge University Press, vol. 11(1), pages 23-43, January.
    • Handle: RePEc:cup:polals:v:11:y:2003:i:01:p:23-43_01
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.cambridge.org/core/product/identifier/S1047198700010482/type/journal_article
    File Function: link to article abstract page
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Michael Bowling, J. & Rimer, Barbara K. & Lyons, Elizabeth J. & Golin, Carol E. & Frydman, Gilles & Ribisl, Kurt M., 2006. "Methodologic challenges of e-health research," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 29(4), pages 390-396, November.
    2. Antonia Moreno & Guillermo Sanz & Begonya Garcia-Zapirain, 2021. "hGLUTEN Tool: Measuring Its Social Impact Indicators," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(23), pages 1-18, December.
    3. Lindhjem, Henrik & Navrud, Ståle, 2008. "Internet CV surveys – a cheap, fast way to get large samples of biased values?," MPRA Paper 11471, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    4. Carsten Jensen & Jens Thomsen, 2014. "Self-reported cheating in web surveys on political knowledge," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 48(6), pages 3343-3354, November.
    5. Lindhjem, Henrik & Navrud, Ståle, 2010. "Can cheap panel-based internet surveys substitute costly in-person interviews in CV surveys?," MPRA Paper 24069, University Library of Munich, Germany.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:cup:polals:v:11:y:2003:i:01:p:23-43_01. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Kirk Stebbing (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.cambridge.org/pan .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.