Skip Navigation


Public Opinion Quarterly Advance Access originally published online on January 29, 2009
Public Opinion Quarterly 2008 72(5):831-835; doi:10.1093/poq/nfn066
This Article
Right arrow Full Text Freely available
Right arrow FREE Full Text (PDF) Freely available
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
72/5/831    most recent
nfn066v1
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Couper, M. P.
Right arrow Articles by Miller, P. V.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

© The Author 2009. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the American Association for Public Opinion Research. All rights reserved. For permissions, please e-mail: journals.permissions@oxfordjournals.org

Web Survey Methods

Introduction

Mick P. Couper and Peter V. Miller

Address correspondence to Mick P. Couper; e-mail: mcouper@isr.umich.edu

The first 150 words of the full text of this article appear below.

A key characteristic of Web surveys is their diversity. Unlike other modes of data collection, where the method tells us something about both the sampling process and the method of data collection, the term "Web survey" is too broad to give us much useful information about how the study was carried out. For example, referring to an RDD telephone survey describes both the method of sampling (in part) and the mode of data collection. But there are so many different ways to identify sampling frames for Web surveys, to invite people to complete such surveys, and to administer surveys over the Internet (see Couper 2000Go) that the term "Web survey" conveys little evaluative information. The implications of this diversity are twofold. First, broad generalizations . . . [Full Text of this Article]


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?