Do We Have to Mix Modes in Probability- Based Online Panel Research to Obtain More Accurate Results?

被引:0
作者
Kocar, Sebastian [1 ]
Biddle, Nicholas [2 ]
机构
[1] Univ Tasmania, Inst Social Change, Hobart, Tas, Australia
[2] Australian Natl Univ, ANU Ctr Social Res & Methods, Canberra, ACT, Australia
来源
METHODS DATA ANALYSES | 2022年
关键词
online panels; online and offline populations; mixed-mode data collection; representation errors; benchmarking; NON-INTERNET HOUSEHOLDS; WEB SURVEYS; COVERAGE; SELECTION; BIAS;
D O I
10.12758/mda.2022.11
中图分类号
O1 [数学]; C [社会科学总论];
学科分类号
03 ; 0303 ; 0701 ; 070101 ;
摘要
Online probability-based panels often apply two or more data collection modes to cover both the online and offline populations with the aim of obtaining results that are more representative of the population of interest. This study used such a panel to investigate how necessary it is, from the coverage error standpoint, to include the offline population by mixing modes in online panel survey research. This study evaluated the problem from three different perspectives: undercoverage bias, bias related to survey item topics and variable characteristics, and accuracy of online-only samples relative to nationally representative benchmarks. The results indicated that attitudinal, behavioral, and factual differences between the online and offline populations in Australia are, on average, minor. This means that, considering that survey research commonly includes a relatively low proportion of the offline population, survey estimates would not be significantly affected if probability based panels did not mix modes and instead were online only, for the majority of topics. The benchmarking analysis showed that mixing the online mode with the offline mode did not improve the average accuracy of estimates relative to nationally representative benchmarks. Based on these findings, it is argued that other online panels should study this issue from different perspectives using the approaches proposed in this paper. There might also be an argument for (temporarily) excluding the offline population in probability-based online panel research in particular country contexts as this might have practical implications.
引用
收藏
页码:93 / 120
页数:27
相关论文
共 48 条
  • [1] American Association for Public Opinion Research, 2016, STAND DEF FIN DISP C
  • [2] Australia Bureau of Statistics, 2016, CENS POP HOUS
  • [3] Australian Bureau of Statistics, 2018, HOUS INT ACC
  • [4] Australian Bureau of Statistics, 2015, NAT HLTH SURV 2014 1
  • [5] Australian Institute of Health and Welfare, 2014, NATL DRUG STRATEGY H, DOI [10.4225/87/USGEQS, DOI 10.4225/87/USGEQS]
  • [6] Weighting Strategies for Combining Data from Dual-Frame Telephone Surveys: Emerging Evidence from Australia
    Baffour, Bernard
    Haynes, Michele
    Western, Mark
    Pennay, Darren
    Misson, Sebastian
    Martinez, Arturo
    [J]. JOURNAL OF OFFICIAL STATISTICS, 2016, 32 (03) : 549 - 578
  • [7] Research Synthesis
    Baker, Reg
    Blumberg, Stephen J.
    Brick, J. Michael
    Couper, Mick P.
    Courtright, Melanie
    Dennis, J. Michael
    Dillman, Don
    Frankel, Martin R.
    Garland, Philip
    Groves, Robert M.
    Kennedy, Courtney
    Krosnick, Jon
    Lavrakas, Paul J.
    Lee, Sunghee
    Link, Michael
    Piekarski, Linda
    Rao, Kumar
    Thomas, Randall K.
    Zahs, Dan
    [J]. PUBLIC OPINION QUARTERLY, 2010, 74 (04) : 711 - 781
  • [8] Bialik K., 2018, ASKING YOUR SLEEP SM
  • [9] Biddle N, 2018, CSRM SRC METHODS PAP, V2018
  • [10] Does the Recruitment of Offline Households Increase the Sample Representativeness of Probability-Based Online Panels? Evidence From the German Internet Panel
    Blom, Annelies G.
    Herzing, Jessica M. E.
    Cornesse, Carina
    Sakshaug, Joseph W.
    Krieger, Ulrich
    Bossert, Dayana
    [J]. SOCIAL SCIENCE COMPUTER REVIEW, 2017, 35 (04) : 498 - 520