Survey-experiments: Data and analysis

Warning

JFolder::create: Could not create folder.Path: /var/www/co/media/com_comment/cache

: Published: 21 January 2017

Issues to be addressed:

Limits and opportunities of online samples
Internal validity and external validity of those samples
Statistical analysis of data from online experiments

Participants: Barna Ildikó, Gulyás Attila, Hajdu Gábor, Janky Béla, Kisfalusi Dorottya, Kmetty Zoltán, Koltai Júlia, Németh Renáta, Simonovits Bori, Stefkovics Ádám

First meeting, .21 October 2016, Pécs

Survey experiments in Hungary

Organizer: Bognár Adrienn

Presenters: Hajdu Gábor, Janky Béla, Koltai Júlia, Restás Péter, Simonovits Bori

Special guest: Murányi Pista

Summaries of the presented readings by Naszályi Natália (meetings #2-6)

Second meeting, 10 March 2017

External validity of survey experiments based on non-representative online samples

Presenter: Kmetty Zoltán

Summary by Barna Ildikó (in Hungarian)

Presented readings

Mutz, D. C. (2011). Population-based survey experiments. Princeton University Press (Ch 1, 8).

Clifford, S., & Jerit, J. (2014). Is there a cost to convenience? An experimental comparison of data quality in laboratory and online studies. Journal of Experimental Political Science, 1(02), 120-131.

Hauser, D. J., & Schwarz, N. (2016). Attentive Turkers: MTurk participants perform better on online attention checks than do subject pool participants. Behavior research methods, 48(1), 400-407.

Mullinix, K. J., Leeper, T. J., Druckman, J. N., & Freese, J. (2015). The generalizability of survey experiments. Journal of Experimental Political Science, 2(02), 109-138.

Weinberg, J. D., Freese, J., & McElhattan, D. (2014). Comparing data characteristics and results of an online factorial survey between a population-based and a crowdsource-recruited sample. Sociological Science, 1, 292-310.

Third meeting, 31 March

Mode effects

Presenter: Stefkovics Ádám

Presented readings

Bowling, A. (2005). Mode of questionnaire administration can have serious effects on data quality. Journal of public health, 27(3), 281-291.

Gray, M., Blake, M., & Campanelli, P. (2014). The use of cognitive interviewing methods to evaluate mode effects in survey questions. Field Methods, 26(2), 156-171.

Heerwegh, D. (2009). Mode differences between face-to-face and web surveys: an experimental investigation of data quality and social desirability effects. International Journal of Public Opinion Research, 21(1), 111-121.

Jäckle, A., Roberts, C., & Lynn, P. (2010). Assessing the effect of data collection mode on measurement. International Statistical Review, 78(1), 3-20.

Kreuter, F., Presser, S., & Tourangeau, R. (2008). Social desirability bias in CATI, IVR, and Web surveys the effects of mode and question sensitivity. Public Opinion Quarterly, 72(5), 847-865.

Why do polls keep failing?

Presenter: Németh Renáta

Presented readings

Carlos Alberto Gomez Grajales (2016): Why do polls keep failing? Blog post, 16. November 2016. Statistics Views.

Sturgis, P. Baker, N. Callegaro, M. Fisher, S. Green, J. Jennings, W. Kuha, J. Lauderdale, B. and Smith, P. Report of the Inquiry into the 2015 British general election opinion polls, London: Market Research Society and British Polling Council. (March, 2016)

Clarke, Harold D., Goodwin, Matthew and Whiteley, Paul (2016) Leave was always in the lead: why the polls got the referendum result wrong. LSE European Politics and Policy (EUROPP) Blog.