This paper explores the problems and challenges surrounding the conduct of research via the internet among business audiences and highlights the great potential that exists for business-to-business research over the net. It also identifies some of the main obstacles to researching in this way, and examines the factors which cause them.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
AdriaenssensC., & CadmanL.. (1999) An adaptation of Moderated Email Focus Groups to assess the potential for a new online (internet) financial services offer in the UK.Journal of the Market Research Society, 41, 4, pp. 417–424.
2.
BecharIsraeliH.. (1998) From <Bonehead> to <Clonehead>: nicknames, identity and play on internet Relay Chat.Journal of Computer Mediated Communication.
CattellL.. (2001) The mobile internet revolution and its implications for research. ESOMAR Worldwide Internet Conference, Net Effects 4, 1113 February, Barcelona, Spain, pp. 191–212.
7.
ClarkeK.. (2000) Businesstobusiness research. Research among business people and professionals. In WrightL.T., & CrimpM. (Eds), The Marketing Research Process (5th edn). Harlow: Pearson Education.
8.
ComleyP.. (2000) Moderated email groups.International Journal of Market Research, 42, 1, pp. 111–112.
9.
DexterA., BrownA., & SmithD.V.L. (2000) No matches found the hidden personality of the Internet User.ESOMAR Congress, 1720 September, Vienna, Austria.
10.
DommeyerC.J., & MoriartyE.. (2000) Comparing two forms of an email survey: embedded vs. attached.International Journal of Market Research, 42, 1, pp. 39–50.
11.
EichmanC., SeggerE., MezzasalmaA., & LicastroG.. (2001) Values added from internet research: enhanced usefulness, methodological innovation and global partnership. ESOMAR Worldwide Internet Conference, Net Effects 4, 1113February, Barcelona, Spain, pp. 43–60.
12.
FloodV.. (2000) Brand building in the age of ecommerce: have the ‘rules’ changed? The Market Research Society Conference Papers, MRS, London, pp. 437–446.
13.
GriffithsM.. (1997) Does internet and computer addiction exist? Some case study evidence. The American Psychological Association Conference, 15 August 1997, Chicago, USA.
JohnstonA.. (1999) Welcome to the wired world.Research, 402, pp. 22–25.
16.
KentR., & LeeM.. (1999) Using the internet for market research: a study of private trading on the internet.Journal of the Market Research Society, 41, 4, pp. 377–385.
17.
MehtaR., & SivadasE.. (1995) Comparing response rates and response content in mail versus electronic mail surveys.Journal of the Market Research Society, 37, 4, pp. 429–439.
18.
MillerJ.. (2000) Net v phone: the great debate.Research, 411, pp. 26–27.
19.
MontgomeryE.. (2001) Getting a response.Research, 420, May, pp. 32–33.
20.
MooreA.G. (1991). Crossing the Chasm: Marketing and Selling HighTech Products to Mainstream Customers.New York: HarperCollins.
21.
NobleI., MoonN., & McVeyD.. (1998) ‘Bringing it all back home’ using RDD telephone methods for largescale social policy and opinion research in the UK.Journal of the Market Research Society, 40, 2, pp. 93–120.
22.
NordnJ., & JohanssonJ.. (2001) Faster, cheaper, better. Wireless dialogue at every point of sale. ESOMAR Worldwide Internet Conference, Net Effects 4, 1113February, Barcelona, Spain, pp. 229–240.
23.
OzerM.. (1999) The use of internetbased groupware in new product forecasting.Journal of the Market Research Society, 41, 4, pp. 425–438.
24.
PartridgeK., & KamerA.. (2001) Speed, power and efficiency: the impact of wireless technology on internet research. ESOMAR Worldwide Internet Conference, Net Effects 4, 1113 February, Barcelona, Spain, pp. 213–227.
25.
PincottG., & BranthwaiteA.. (2000) Nothing new under the sun? The Market Research Society Conference Papers, MRS, London, pp. 359–370.
26.
PoynterR.. (2001) Exciting new conjoint options, via the web. ESOMAR Worldwide Internet Conference, Net Effects 4, 1113 February, Barcelona, Spain, pp. 31–44.
27.
SandersM.R. (2001). Global eCommerce Approaches Hypergrowth.Forrester Research Briefing Document, 18 April, Cambridge, USA.
28.
SheehanK.B., & HoyM.G. (1997) Email surveys: patterns, process and potential.Academy of American Advertising Conference, 6 April, St Louis, USA.
29.
SchillewaertN., LangerakF., & DuhamelT.. (1998) Nonprobability sampling for www surveys: a comparison of methods.Journal of the Market Research Society, 40, 4, pp. 307–322.
30.
SmilowitzM., ComptonD.C., & FlintL.. (1988) The effects of computer mediated communication on an individual's judgement: a study based on the methods of Asch's social influence experiment.Computers in Human Behaviour, 4, pp. 311–321.
TaylorH.. (2000) Does internet research work? Comparing online survey results with telephone survey.International Journal of Market Research, 42, 1, pp. 51–63.
33.
WillkeJ., AdamsC.O., & GirniusZ.. (1999) Internet testing. A landmark study of the differences between mall intercept and online interviewing in the United States. ESOMAR Worldwide Internet Conference, Net Effects, 2123 February, London.
34.
WillkeJ., LundyS., & MustardD.. (2000). Burning Out Internet Respondents. Avoiding the Mistakes of the Past.Net Effects 3, ESOMAR Publication Series, Vol. 237.
35.
YoungK.S. (1998). Caught in the Net.New York: John Wiley & Sons.
