Using pencil and paper, Internet and touch-tone phones for self-administered surveys: does methodology matter?

An Assessment of Equivalence Between Online and Mail Surveys in Service Research

“…In Table 2, we provide an overview of existing empirical evidence regarding the difference between, or equivalence of, online and mail surveys, which demonstrates that this evidence is very inconclusive. Whereas several studies find differences-including factor structures, socially desirable answers, more extreme responses, higher item completion, higher item variability, and higher measurement error in online surveys (Klassen and Jacobs 2001;Shermis and Lombard 1999;Stanton 1998)-others indicate that online and mail surveys are equivalent (Epstein et al 2001;Knapp and Kirk 2003). These conflicting results may be due to, for example, differences in the response processes for online and mail surveys.…”

Measuring health beliefs on the Internet: A comparison of paper and Internet administrations of the Multidimensional Health Locus of Control Scale

“…However, the vast majority of IMR validation studies to date have reported equivalence between Internet and non-Internet implementations, despite differences in both mode of administration and sample composition (e.g., see the studies cited above). Furthermore, those studies that have controlled for sample equivalence also have typically failed to show a mode effect (e.g., Cronk & West, 2002;Epstein, Klinkenberg, Wiley, & McKinley, 2001;Herrero & Meneses, in press;Huang, 2006;Knapp & Kirk, 2003;Metzger, Kristof, & Yoest, 2003;Meyerson & Tryon, 2003;Smither, Walker, & Yap, 2004 The problem of reduced levels of researcher control over stimulus materials (e.g., Krantz, 2001), participation environment (e.g., Barbeite & Weiss, 2004), and participant behavior (e.g., has been identified as a key issue in IMR. Different hardware and software configurations may easily cause stimulus display variability, and researchers can never be entirely sure that participants have followed instructions as directed.…”

Identification of food groups for use in a self-administered, computer-assisted diet history interview for use in Australia

“…The use of computer-assisted interviews has the advantage of incorporating some of the benefits of both face-to-face interviews and the FFQ format while improving the time efficiency and processing speed. Computerassisted interviews are also well acceptance by participants (Knapp andKirk, 2003, Weber et al, 2003) and can range from an interviewer-administered format where a dietitian or researcher asks all the questions and enters the responses into the computer, through to a self-administered format where the patient or participant reads or listen to the questions and enters the responses into the computer themselves.…”