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)

    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. Karytsas, Spyridon & Theodoropoulou, Helen, 2014. "Socioeconomic and demographic factors that influence publics' awareness on the different forms of renewable energy sources," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 71(C), pages 480-485.
    5. Mozumder, Pallab & Vásquez, William F. & Marathe, Achla, 2011. "Consumers' preference for renewable energy in the southwest USA," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 33(6), pages 1119-1126.
    6. 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.
    7. Sakshaug Joseph W. & Wiśniowski Arkadiusz & Ruiz Diego Andres Perez & Blom Annelies G., 2019. "Supplementing Small Probability Samples with Nonprobability Samples: A Bayesian Approach," Journal of Official Statistics, Sciendo, vol. 35(3), pages 653-681, September.
    8. 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.
    9. Lin, Boqiang & Qiao, Qiao, 2023. "Exploring the participation willingness and potential carbon emission reduction of Chinese residential green electricity market," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 174(C).
    10. Temporão, Mickael & Dufresne, Yannick & Savoie, Justin & Linden, Clifton van der, 2019. "Crowdsourcing the vote: New horizons in citizen forecasting," International Journal of Forecasting, Elsevier, vol. 35(1), pages 1-10.
    11. Andrew Gelman & Christian Hennig, 2017. "Beyond subjective and objective in statistics," Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series A, Royal Statistical Society, vol. 180(4), pages 967-1033, October.
    12. 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.
    13. 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.
    14. Sebastien Rojon & Jean-Benoit Pilet, 2021. "Engaged, Indifferent, Skeptical or Critical? Disentangling Attitudes towards Local Deliberative Mini-Publics in Four Western European Democracies," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(19), pages 1-19, September.
    15. John C. Whitehead & Andrew Ropicki & John Loomis & Sherry Larkin & Tim Haab & Sergio Alvarez, 2023. "Estimating the benefits to Florida households from avoiding another Gulf oil spill using the contingent valuation method: Internal validity tests with probability‐based and opt‐in samples," Applied Economic Perspectives and Policy, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 45(2), pages 705-720, June.
    16. repec:plo:pone00:0175799 is not listed on IDEAS
    17. 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.
    18. James William Benjamin Elsey & David Manheim & Abigail Marsh & Virginia Schmit & David Moss, 2024. "Ethical acceptability of human challenge trials: Consultation with the US public and with research personnel," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 19(10), pages 1-18, October.
    19. 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.
    20. Sean F. Ellis & Olesya M. Savchenko & Kent D. Messer, 2023. "Is a non-representative convenience sample of adults good enough? Insights from an economic experiment," Journal of the Economic Science Association, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 9(2), pages 293-307, December.
    21. Mark Huberty, 2015. "Awaiting the Second Big Data Revolution: From Digital Noise to Value Creation," Journal of Industry, Competition and Trade, Springer, vol. 15(1), pages 35-47, March.

    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.