IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/qualqt/v48y2014i4p2069-2088.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Survey topic and unit nonresponse

Author

Listed:
  • Doreen Zillmann
  • Andreas Schmitz
  • Jan Skopek
  • Hans-Peter Blossfeld

Abstract

Survey topic as a factor influencing participation rates is becoming increasingly important, as there is a growing trend in social science research for surveying specific populations about specific topics. Previous research has shown that respondents with high topic interest (often referred to as salience) are more likely to participate in surveys. However, the identification of mechanisms that affect respondents’ interest in a survey topic has been largely neglected in research literature. We present an explanatory model of participation that conceptualizes topic interest as a function of an actor’s relational position in a particular social setting. To illustrate the relationship between survey topic and participation behavior, we use an online survey on mating conducted on the user population of an online dating site. For our nonresponse analysis we use web-generated process data, consisting of profile and interaction data, which describe all units of the sample frame. Thus, comprehensive information is available for both participants and non-participants of the online survey on an individual level, enabling a particularly accurate analysis of nonresponse. Results show that the probability of participation varies according to a user’s chances of success on the mating market. Users who can be described as less attractive (e.g. older people, less educated men, overweight women) show a higher probability of participation, which we explain with the mechanism of topic salience. We conclude with general implications regarding (1) the relationship between survey topic and survey participation and (2) the potential of web-generated process data for (online) survey research. Copyright Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2014

Suggested Citation

  • Doreen Zillmann & Andreas Schmitz & Jan Skopek & Hans-Peter Blossfeld, 2014. "Survey topic and unit nonresponse," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 48(4), pages 2069-2088, July.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:qualqt:v:48:y:2014:i:4:p:2069-2088
    DOI: 10.1007/s11135-013-9880-y
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1007/s11135-013-9880-y
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s11135-013-9880-y?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
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Henk Roose & Hans Waege & Filip Agneessens, 2003. "Respondent Related Correlates of Response Behaviour in Audience Research," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 37(4), pages 411-434, November.
    2. Günter Hitsch & Ali Hortaçsu & Dan Ariely, 2010. "What makes you click?—Mate preferences in online dating," Quantitative Marketing and Economics (QME), Springer, vol. 8(4), pages 393-427, December.
    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. Jian Han & Miaodan Fang & Shenglu Ye & Chuansheng Chen & Qun Wan & Xiuying Qian, 2019. "Using Decision Tree to Predict Response Rates of Consumer Satisfaction, Attitude, and Loyalty Surveys," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(8), pages 1-13, April.
    2. Alice Barth & Andreas Schmitz, 2018. "Response quality and ideological dispositions: an integrative approach using geometric and classifying techniques," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 52(1), pages 175-194, January.

    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. Gal-Or, Esther, 2020. "Market segmentation on dating platforms," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 68(C).
    2. Ran Abramitzky & Adeline Delavande & Luis Vasconcelos, 2011. "Marrying Up: The Role of Sex Ratio in Assortative Matching," American Economic Journal: Applied Economics, American Economic Association, vol. 3(3), pages 124-157, July.
    3. Xu, Yujing & Yang, Huanxing, 2019. "Targeted search with horizontal differentiation in the marriage market," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 164(C), pages 31-62.
    4. Ingela Alger & Donald Cox, 2013. "The evolution of altruistic preferences: mothers versus fathers," Review of Economics of the Household, Springer, vol. 11(3), pages 421-446, September.
    5. Abigail Weitzman & Dalton Conley, 2014. "From Assortative to Ashortative Coupling: Men's Height, Height Heterogamy, and Relationship Dynamics in the United States," NBER Working Papers 20402, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    6. Anna NAZSZODI & Francisco MENDONCA, 2023. "A new method for identifying the role of marital preferences at shaping marriage patterns," JODE - Journal of Demographic Economics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 89(1), pages 1-27, March.
    7. Michael Malcolm & Ilker Kaya, 2016. "Selection works both ways: BMI and marital formation among young women," Review of Economics of the Household, Springer, vol. 14(2), pages 293-311, June.
    8. Thompson, Kristina & Koolman, Xander & Portrait, France, 2021. "Height and marital outcomes in the Netherlands, birth years 1841-1900," Economics & Human Biology, Elsevier, vol. 41(C).
    9. Manoj Thomas & Daniela Costa & Tiago Oliveira, 2016. "Assessing the role of IT-enabled process virtualization on green IT adoption," Information Systems Frontiers, Springer, vol. 18(4), pages 693-710, August.
    10. Henk Roose & John Lievens & Hans Waege, 2007. "The Joint Effect of Topic Interest and Follow-Up Procedures on the Response in a Mail Questionnaire," Sociological Methods & Research, , vol. 35(3), pages 410-428, February.
    11. Ong, David & Wang, Jue, 2015. "Income attraction: An online dating field experiment," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 111(C), pages 13-22.
    12. Muriel Niederle & Leeat Yariv, 2009. "Decentralized Matching with Aligned Preferences," NBER Working Papers 14840, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    13. Neyt, Brecht & Vandenbulcke, Sarah & Baert, Stijn, 2019. "Are men intimidated by highly educated women? Undercover on Tinder," Economics of Education Review, Elsevier, vol. 73(C).
    14. Olga Maslovskaya & Peter Lugtig, 2022. "Representativeness in six waves of CROss‐National Online Survey (CRONOS) panel," Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series A, Royal Statistical Society, vol. 185(3), pages 851-871, July.
    15. Shoshana Grossbard & Sankar Mukhopadhyay, 2017. "Marriage markets as explanation for why heavier people work more hours," IZA Journal of Labor Economics, Springer;Forschungsinstitut zur Zukunft der Arbeit GmbH (IZA), vol. 6(1), pages 1-30, December.
    16. Abhijit Banerjee & Esther Duflo & Maitreesh Ghatak & Jeanne Lafortune, 2013. "Marry for What? Caste and Mate Selection in Modern India," American Economic Journal: Microeconomics, American Economic Association, vol. 5(2), pages 33-72, May.
    17. Manel Khedher, 2019. "Conceptualizing and researching personal branding effects on the employability," Journal of Brand Management, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 26(2), pages 99-109, March.
    18. Shyamal Chowdhury & Debdulal Mallick & Prabal Roy Chowdhury, 2017. "Natural Shock and Marriage Markets: Evolution of Mehr and Dowry in Muslim Marriages," Discussion Papers 17-02, Indian Statistical Institute, Delhi.
    19. Ong, David & Yang, Yu (Alan) & Zhang, Junsen, 2020. "Hard to get: The scarcity of women and the competition for high-income men in urban China," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 144(C).
    20. Philomena Bacon & Anna Conte & Peter Moffatt, 2014. "Assortative mating on risk attitude," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 77(3), pages 389-401, October.

    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:spr:qualqt:v:48:y:2014:i:4:p:2069-2088. 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    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.