IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/somere/v37y2009i3p371-392.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Design of Web Questionnaires

Author

Listed:
  • Vera Toepoel

    (Tilburg University, Netherlands, V.Toepoel@uvt.nl)

  • Corrie Vis

    (Tilburg University, Netherlands)

  • Marcel Das

    (Tilburg University, Netherlands)

  • Arthur van Soest

    (Tilburg University, Netherlands)

Abstract

In this article, an information-processing perspective is used to explore the impact of response categories on the answers respondents provide in Web surveys. Response categories have a significant effect on response formulation in questions that are difficult to process, whereas in easier questions (where responses are based on direct recall) the response scales have a smaller effect. In general, people with less cognitive sophistication are more affected by contextual cues. The Need for Cognition and the Need to Evaluate indexes for motivation account for a significant part of the variance in survey responding. Interactions of ability to process information and motivation combine in regulating responses for questions that are more difficult to process. The results hint at a substantial role of satisficing in Web surveys.

Suggested Citation

  • Vera Toepoel & Corrie Vis & Marcel Das & Arthur van Soest, 2009. "Design of Web Questionnaires," Sociological Methods & Research, , vol. 37(3), pages 371-392, February.
    • Handle: RePEc:sae:somere:v:37:y:2009:i:3:p:371-392
    DOI: 10.1177/0049124108327123
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0049124108327123
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/0049124108327123?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Menon, Geeta & Raghubir, Priya & Schwarz, Norbert, 1995. "Behavioral Frequency Judgments: An Accessibility-Diagnosticity Framework," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 22(2), pages 212-228, September.
    2. Lynch, John G, Jr & Chakravarti, Dipankar & Mitra, Anusree, 1991. "Contrast Effects in Consumer Judgments: Changes in Mental Representations or in the Anchoring of Rating Scales?," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 18(3), pages 284-297, December.
    3. Michael D. Hurd & Daniel McFadden & Harish Chand & Li Gan & Angela Menill & Michael Roberts, 1998. "Consumption and Savings Balances of the Elderly: Experimental Evidence on Survey Response Bias," NBER Chapters, in: Frontiers in the Economics of Aging, pages 353-392, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Riccardo Testa & Giorgio Schifani & Giuseppina Migliore, 2021. "Understanding Consumers’ Convenience Orientation. An Exploratory Study of Fresh-Cut Fruit in Italy," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(3), pages 1-13, January.
    2. Tobias Gummer & Tanja Kunz, 2022. "Relying on External Information Sources When Answering Knowledge Questions in Web Surveys," Sociological Methods & Research, , vol. 51(2), pages 816-836, May.
    3. Chatpong Tangmanee & Phattharaphong Niruttinanon, 2015. "Effects of Forced Responses and Question Display Styles on Web Survey Response Rates," International Journal of Research in Business and Social Science (2147-4478), Center for the Strategic Studies in Business and Finance, vol. 4(2), pages 54-62, April.
    4. Lindhjem, Henrik & Navrud, Ståle, 2011. "Using Internet in Stated Preference Surveys: A Review and Comparison of Survey Modes," International Review of Environmental and Resource Economics, now publishers, vol. 5(4), pages 309-351, September.
    5. Carina Cornesse & Annelies G. Blom, 2023. "Response Quality in Nonprobability and Probability-based Online Panels," Sociological Methods & Research, , vol. 52(2), pages 879-908, May.
    6. Fabo, B., 2017. "Towards an understanding of job matching using web data," Other publications TiSEM b8b877f2-ae6a-495f-b6cc-9, Tilburg University, School of Economics and Management.
    7. Chatpong Tangmanee & Phattharaphong Niruttinanon, 2019. "Web Survey’s Completion Rates: Effects of Forced Responses, Question Display Styles, and Subjects’ Attitude," International Journal of Research in Business and Social Science (2147-4478), Center for the Strategic Studies in Business and Finance, vol. 8(1), pages 20-29, January.
    8. Neuert Cornelia E. & Roßmann Joss & Silber Henning, 2023. "Using Eye-Tracking Methodology to Study Grid Question Designs in Web Surveys," Journal of Official Statistics, Sciendo, vol. 39(1), pages 79-101, March.
    9. Brauner, Jacob, 2020. "Are Smileys Valid Answers? Survey Data Quality with Innovative Item Formats," SocArXiv dk9bc, Center for Open Science.
    10. Bart Buelens & Jan A. van den Brakel, 2015. "Measurement Error Calibration in Mixed-mode Sample Surveys," Sociological Methods & Research, , vol. 44(3), pages 391-426, August.
    11. Dana Garbarski & Nora Cate Schaeffer & Jennifer Dykema, 2019. "The Effects of Features of Survey Measurement on Self-Rated Health: Response Option Order and Scale Orientation," Applied Research in Quality of Life, Springer;International Society for Quality-of-Life Studies, vol. 14(2), pages 545-560, April.
    12. Yüksel, Atila, 2017. "A critique of “Response Bias” in the tourism, travel and hospitality research," Tourism Management, Elsevier, vol. 59(C), pages 376-384.
    13. de Bruijne, M.A., 2015. "Designing web surveys for the multi-device internet," Other publications TiSEM 19e4d446-a62b-4a95-8691-8, Tilburg University, School of Economics and Management.
    14. Tobias Gummer & Joss Roßmann & Henning Silber, 2021. "Using Instructed Response Items as Attention Checks in Web Surveys: Properties and Implementation," Sociological Methods & Research, , vol. 50(1), pages 238-264, February.
    15. Anna DeCastellarnau, 2018. "A classification of response scale characteristics that affect data quality: a literature review," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 52(4), pages 1523-1559, July.
    16. Weijters, Bert & Millet, Kobe & Cabooter, Elke, 2021. "Extremity in horizontal and vertical Likert scale format responses. Some evidence on how visual distance between response categories influences extreme responding," International Journal of Research in Marketing, Elsevier, vol. 38(1), pages 85-103.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Toepoel, V. & Vis, C.M. & Das, J.W.M. & van Soest, A.H.O., 2006. "Design of Web Questionnaires : An Information Processing Perspective for the Effect of Response Categories," Other publications TiSEM bb20f0d3-5f5d-46b3-92f4-2, Tilburg University, School of Economics and Management.
    2. Katarzyna Stasiuk & Dominika Maison, 2022. "The Influence of New and Old Energy Labels on Consumer Judgements and Decisions about Household Appliances," Energies, MDPI, vol. 15(4), pages 1-13, February.
    3. Lothar Essig & Joachim K. Winter, 2009. "Item Non-Response to Financial Questions in Household Surveys: An Experimental Study of Interviewer and Mode Effects," Fiscal Studies, Institute for Fiscal Studies, vol. 30(Special I), pages 367-390, December.
    4. van Soest, Arthur & Hurd, Michael, 2008. "A Test for Anchoring and Yea-Saying in Experimental Consumption Data," Journal of the American Statistical Association, American Statistical Association, vol. 103, pages 126-136, March.
    5. Sohn, Stefanie, 2017. "A contextual perspective on consumers' perceived usefulness: The case of mobile online shopping," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 38(C), pages 22-33.
    6. Michael D. Hurd & Daniel McFadden & Angela Merrill, 2001. "Predictors of Mortality among the Elderly," NBER Chapters, in: Themes in the Economics of Aging, pages 171-198, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    7. Arslan, Ruben C. & Brümmer, Martin & Dohmen, Thomas & Drewelies, Johanna & Hertwig, Ralph & Wagner, Gert G., 2020. "How people know their risk preference," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 10.
    8. David Soberman & Loïc Sadoulet, 2007. "Campaign Spending Limits and Political Advertising," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 53(10), pages 1521-1532, October.
    9. Daniel McFadden, 2001. "Economic Choices," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 91(3), pages 351-378, June.
    10. repec:ebl:ecbull:v:3:y:2004:i:9:p:1-12 is not listed on IDEAS
    11. Peter Adams & Michael D. Hurd & Daniel L. McFadden & Angela Merrill & Tiago Ribeiro, 2004. "Healthy, Wealthy, and Wise? Tests for Direct Causal Paths between Health and Socioeconomic Status," NBER Chapters, in: Perspectives on the Economics of Aging, pages 415-526, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    12. Michael D. Hurd & Susann Rohwedder, 2006. "Economic Well-Being at Older Ages: Income- and Consumption-Based Poverty Measures in the HRS," NBER Working Papers 12680, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    13. Maier, Erik, 2019. "Serial product evaluations online: A three-factor model of leadership, fluency and tedium during product search," International Journal of Research in Marketing, Elsevier, vol. 36(4), pages 558-579.
    14. Marcelo Vinhal Nepomuceno & Michel Laroche, 2017. "When Materialists Intend to Resist Consumption: The Moderating Role of Self-Control and Long-Term Orientation," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 143(3), pages 467-483, July.
    15. Michael Hurd & Daniel McFadden & Angela Merrill & Tiago Ribeiro, 2000. "Healthy, Wealthy, and Wise? Socioeconomic Status and Morbidity/Mortality," Econometric Society World Congress 2000 Contributed Papers 1887, Econometric Society.
    16. Ivar Krumpal & Heiko Rauhut & Dorothea Böhr & Elias Naumann, 2011. "The framing of risks and the communication of subjective probabilities for victimizations," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 45(6), pages 1331-1348, October.
    17. Chunhua Wu & Koray Cosguner, 2020. "Profiting from the Decoy Effect: A Case Study of an Online Diamond Retailer," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 39(5), pages 974-995, September.
    18. Alois Geyer & Daniela Kremslehner & Alexander Muermann, 2020. "Asymmetric Information in Automobile Insurance: Evidence From Driving Behavior," Journal of Risk & Insurance, The American Risk and Insurance Association, vol. 87(4), pages 969-995, December.
    19. repec:dau:papers:123456789/4234 is not listed on IDEAS
    20. Béatrice Parguel & Florence Benoît-Moreau & Fabrice Larceneux, 2011. "How Sustainability Ratings Might Deter ‘Greenwashing’: A Closer Look at Ethical Corporate Communication," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 102(1), pages 15-28, August.
    21. Rosalia Vazquez-Alvarez, 2003. "Anchoring Bias and Covariate Nonresponse," University of St. Gallen Department of Economics working paper series 2003 2003-19, Department of Economics, University of St. Gallen.
    22. Robert Belli & Sangeeta Agrawal & Ipek Bilgen, 2012. "Health status and disability comparisons between CATI calendar and conventional questionnaire instruments," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 46(3), pages 813-828, April.

    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:sae:somere:v:37:y:2009:i:3:p:371-392. 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.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with 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: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    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.