IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/zbw/espost/331212.html

Social media sampling is an effective way to access hard to survey populations and low prevalence groups

Author

Listed:
  • Klinke, Dennis
  • Jacobsen, Jannes
  • Dierse, Manuel
  • Faas, Thorsten
  • Gerstorf, Denis
  • Helal, Hannah
  • Hutter, Swen
  • Schieferdecker, David
  • Schwander, Hanna
  • von Scheve, Christian
  • Specht, Jule

Abstract

Non-probability samples have become increasingly popular despite some criticism. This paper examines social media sampling as a tool for accessing hard-to-survey populations. Our study targeted individuals in Germany using ads on Facebook and X, yielding 4,590 respondents. We compared these samples with high-quality probability samples (SOEP, ESS) through measurement equivalence analysis of shared measures between samples. Results show that our social media sampling strategy yielded effective sample sizes for our target population that exceeded those from SOEP and ESS by ratios between 2:1 and 5:1. Our findings suggest that non-probability sampling can be a viable method for researchers examining relational patterns among variables in hard-to-survey populations. Because we observe varying levels of measurement equivalence, rigorous methodological strategies for post-hoc analyses are recommended. We propose measurement equivalence analysis as a post-hoc assessment strategy to quantify the analytical effectiveness of the employed sampling strategy.

Suggested Citation

  • Klinke, Dennis & Jacobsen, Jannes & Dierse, Manuel & Faas, Thorsten & Gerstorf, Denis & Helal, Hannah & Hutter, Swen & Schieferdecker, David & Schwander, Hanna & von Scheve, Christian & Specht, Jule, 2025. "Social media sampling is an effective way to access hard to survey populations and low prevalence groups," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, issue Latest Ar, pages 1-20.
    • Handle: RePEc:zbw:espost:331212
    DOI: 10.1080/13645579.2025.2564866
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.econstor.eu/bitstream/10419/331212/1/Full-text-article-Klinke-et-al-Social-media.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1080/13645579.2025.2564866?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. Berrens, Robert P. & Bohara, Alok K. & Jenkins-Smith, Hank & Silva, Carol & Weimer, David L., 2003. "The Advent of Internet Surveys for Political Research: A Comparison of Telephone and Internet Samples," Political Analysis, Cambridge University Press, vol. 11(1), pages 1-22, January.
    2. Wang, Wei & Rothschild, David & Goel, Sharad & Gelman, Andrew, 2015. "Forecasting elections with non-representative polls," International Journal of Forecasting, Elsevier, vol. 31(3), pages 980-991.
    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. Schieferdecker, David & Jacobsen, Jannes & Borbáth, Endre & Hutter, Swen & Specht, Jule, 2026. "The effects of turnout at major climate protests on politically-interested bystanders: a survey field experiment," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 5, pages 1-5.

    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. Hui Li & Robert P. Berrens & Alok K. Bohara & Hank C. Jenkins-Smith & Carol L. Silva & David L. Weimer, 2005. "Exploring the Beta Model Using Proportional Budget Information in a Contingent Valuation Study," Economics Bulletin, AccessEcon, vol. 17(8), pages 1-9.
    2. Kevin J. Boyle & Mark Morrison & Darla Hatton MacDonald & Roderick Duncan & John Rose, 2016. "Investigating Internet and Mail Implementation of Stated-Preference Surveys While Controlling for Differences in Sample Frames," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 64(3), pages 401-419, July.
    3. Mark Richard & Jan Vecer, 2021. "Efficiency Testing of Prediction Markets: Martingale Approach, Likelihood Ratio and Bayes Factor Analysis," Risks, MDPI, vol. 9(2), pages 1-20, February.
    4. Aaron C. Sparks & Heather Hodges & Sarah Oliver & Eric R. A. N. Smith, 2020. "Confidence in Local, National, and International Scientists on Climate Change," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(1), pages 1-13, December.
    5. Michael D. Jones, 2014. "Cultural Characters and Climate Change: How Heroes Shape Our Perception of Climate Science," Social Science Quarterly, Southwestern Social Science Association, vol. 95(1), pages 1-39, March.
    6. José Miguel Mansilla Domínguez & Isabel Font Jiménez & Angel Belzunegui Eraso & David Peña Otero & David Díaz Pérez & Ana María Recio Vivas, 2020. "Risk Perception of COVID−19 Community Transmission among the Spanish Population," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(23), pages 1-15, December.
    7. Sánchez, José J. & Baerenklau, Ken & González-Cabán, Armando, 2016. "Valuing hypothetical wildfire impacts with a Kuhn–Tucker model of recreation demand," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 71(C), pages 63-70.
    8. repec:plo:pone00:0175799 is not listed on IDEAS
    9. 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.
    10. François t'Serstevens & Roberto Cerina & Giulia Piccillo, 2024. "Mapping the Risk of Spreading Fake-News via Wisdom-of-the-Crowd & MrP," CESifo Working Paper Series 11138, CESifo.
    11. Beilei Cai & Trudy Cameron & Geoffrey Gerdes, 2010. "Distributional Preferences and the Incidence of Costs and Benefits in Climate Change Policy," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 46(4), pages 429-458, August.
    12. Robert Lohmann, 2019. "Taking a Glimpse Into the Future by Playing?," Simulation & Gaming, , vol. 50(3), pages 377-392, June.
    13. Arthur van Soest & Arie Kapteyn, 2009. "Mode and Context Effects in Measuring Household Assets," Working Papers 200949, Geary Institute, University College Dublin.
    14. J. N. K. Rao, 2021. "On Making Valid Inferences by Integrating Data from Surveys and Other Sources," Sankhya B: The Indian Journal of Statistics, Springer;Indian Statistical Institute, vol. 83(1), pages 242-272, May.
    15. Matthias Schonlau & Arthur van Soest & Arie Kapteyn & Mick Couper, 2009. "Selection Bias in Web Surveys and the Use of Propensity Scores," Sociological Methods & Research, , vol. 37(3), pages 291-318, February.
    16. Beecham, Roger & Clark, Stephen, 2026. "Simulating area-level population outcomes: Should we use Multilevel Regression and Poststratification over Spatial Microsimulation?," SocArXiv erhak_v1, Center for Open Science.
    17. Jincheng Jiang & Jinsong Chen & Wei Tu & Chisheng Wang, 2019. "A Novel Effective Indicator of Weighted Inter-City Human Mobility Networks to Estimate Economic Development," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(22), pages 1-18, November.
    18. repec:osf:osfxxx:pg2wt_v1 is not listed on IDEAS
    19. Roth, Alvin E. & Leider, Stephen, 2010. "Kidneys For Sale: Who Disapproves, and Why?," Scholarly Articles 5128483, Harvard University Department of Economics.
    20. Wirth, Ferdinand F. & Stanton, John L. & Wiley, James B., 2011. "The Relative Importance of Search versus Credence Product Attributes: Organic and Locally Grown," Agricultural and Resource Economics Review, Northeastern Agricultural and Resource Economics Association, vol. 40(01), pages 1-15, April.
    21. Heng Chen & Marie-Hélène Felt & Christopher Henry, 2018. "2017 Methods-of-Payment Survey: Sample Calibration and Variance Estimation," Technical Reports 114, Bank of Canada.
    22. V. Kerry Smith & Carol Mansfield & Aaron Strong, 2008. "Public or Private Production of Food Safety: What Do U.S. Consumers Want?," NBER Working Papers 14287, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    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:zbw:espost:331212. 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: ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/zbwkide.html .

    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.