Response Burden and Dropout in a Probability-Based Online Panel Study – A Comparison between an App and Browser-Based Design

Abstract

Survey respondents can complete web surveys using different Internet-enabled devices (PCs versus mobile phones and tablets) and using different software (web browser versus a mobile software application, “app”). Previous research has found that completing questionnaires via a browser on mobile devices can lead to higher breakoff rates and reduced measurement quality compared to using PCs, especially where questionnaires have not been adapted for mobile administration. A key explanation is that using a mobile browser is more burdensome and less enjoyable for respondents. There are reasons to assume apps should perform better than browsers, but so far, there have been few attempts to assess this empirically. In this study, we investigate variation in experienced burden across device and software in wave 1 of a three-wave panel study, comparing an app with a browser-based survey, in which sample members were encouraged to use a mobile device. We also assess device/software effects on participation at wave 2. We find that compared to mobile browser respondents, app respondents were less likely to drop out of the study after the first wave and the effect of the device used was mediated by subjective burden experienced during wave 1.

Keywords

App-based survey attrition mobile survey usability user satisfaction

References

Allum, N., F. Conrad, and A. Wenz. 2018. “Consequences of Mid-Stream Mode-Switching in a Panel Survey.” Survey Research Methods 12: 43–58. DOI: https://doi.org/10.18148/srm/2018.v12i1.6779.

Antoun, C. 2015. Who are the Internet Users, Mobile Internet Users, and Mobile-Mostly Internet Users?: Demographic Differences Across Internet-Use Subgroups in the U.S.” In Mobile Research Methods: Opportunities and Challenges of Mobile Research Methodologies by D. Toninelli, R. Pinter, and P. Pedraza: 99–117. Ubiquity Press. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5334/bar.g.

Antoun, C., and A. Cernat. 2020. “Factors Affecting Completion Times: A Comparative Analysis of Smartphone and PC Web Surveys.” Social Science Computer Review 38: 477–489. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0894439318823703.

Antoun, C., F.G. Conrad, M.P. Couper, and T.B. West. 2019. “Simultaneous Estimation of Multiple Sources of Error in a Smartphone-Based Survey.” Journal of Survey Statistics and Methodology 7: 93–117. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/jssam/smy002.

Antoun, C., M.P. Couper, and F.G. Conrad. 2017. “Effects of Mobile versus PC Web on Survey Response Quality.” Public Opinion Quarterly 81: 280 – 306. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/poq/nfw088.

Antoun, C., J. Katz, J. Argueta, and L. Wang. 2018. “Design Heuristics for Effective Smartphone Questionnaires.” Social Science Computer Review 36: 557–574. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0894439317727072.

Baron, R.M. and D.A. Kenny. 1986. “The Moderator-Mediator Variable Distinction in Social Psychological Research: Conceptual, Strategic, and Statistical Considerations.” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 51: 1173–1182. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.51.6.1173.

Bosnjak, M., G. Metzger, and L. Gräf. 2010. “Understanding the Willingness to Participate in Mobile Surveys: Exploring the Role of Utilitarian, Affective, Hedonic, Social, Self-Expressive, and Trust-Related Factors.” Social Science Computer Review 28: 350–370. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0894439309353395.

Bradburn, N. 1978. Respondent burden. Health Survey Research Methods, DHEW Publication No. 79-3207: 35–40. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Health, Education, and Welfare. Available at: http://www.asasrms.org/Proceedings/papers/1978_007.pdf (accessed March 2022).

10.

Buskirk, T.D., and C. Andrus. 2012. “Online Surveys Aren’t Just for Computers Anymore! Exploring Potential Mode Effects between Smartphone vs. Computer-based Online Surveys”. In JSM Proceedings, Survey Research Methods Section. Alexandria, VA: American Statistical Association: 5678–5691. Available at: http://www.asasrms.org/Proceedings/y2012f.html (accessed March 2022).

11.

Buskirk, T.D. and C. Andrus. 2014. “Making Mobile Browser Surveys Smarter: Results from a Randomized Experiment Comparing Online Surveys Completed via Computer or Smartphone.” Field Methods 26: 322–342. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/1525822X14526146.

12.

Callegaro, M. 2010. “Do You Know Which Device Your Respondent Has Used to Take Your Online Survey?” Survey Practice 3: 1–12. DOI: https://doi.org/10.29115/sp-2010-0028.

13.

Callegaro, M. 2013. “From Mixed-Mode to Multiple Devices: Web Surveys, Smartphone Surveys and Apps: Has the Respondent Gone Ahead of Us in Answering Surveys?”, International Journal of Market Research 55: 317–320. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2501/IJMR-2013-026.

14.

Callegaro, M., K. Manfreda, and V. Vehovar. 2015. Web Survey Methodology. London, UK: SAGE.

15.

Couper, M.P., C. Antoun, and A. Mavletova. 2017. “Mobile Web Surveys.” In Total Survey Error in Practice edited by P.P. Biemer, E.D. de Leeuw, S. Eckman, B. Edwards, F. Kreuter, L.E. Lyberg, N.C. Tucker, and B.T. West: 133–154. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/9781119041702.ch7.

16.

Couper, M.P. and G.J. Peterson. 2017. “Why Do Web Surveys Take Longer on Smartphones?” Social Science Computer Review 35: 357–377. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0894439316629932.

17.

De Bruijne, M. and A. Wijnant. 2014a. “Mobile Response in Web Panels.” Social Science Computer Review 32: 728–742. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0894439314525918.

18.

De Bruijne, M. and A. Wijnant, A. 2014b. “Improving Response Rates and Questionnaire Design for Mobile Web Surveys.” Public Opinion Quarterly 78: 951–962. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/poq/nfu046.

19.

De Leeuw, E.D. and P. Lugtig. 2014. Dropouts in Longitudinal Surveys. Wiley StatsRef: Statistics Reference Online. John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. DOI: 10.1002/9781118445112.stat06661.pub2.

20.

Dillman, D.A., M.D. Sinclair, and J.R. Clark. 1993. “Effects of Questionnaire Length, Respondent-friendly Design, and a Difficult Question on Response Rates for Occupant-addressed Census Mail Surveys.” Public Opinion Quarterly 57: 289-304. DOI: 10.1086/269376.

21.

Dillman, D.A., J.D. Smyth, and L.M. Christian. 2014. Internet, Mail, and Mixed-mode Surveys: The Tailored Design Method. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons.

22.

Elevelt, A., P. Lugtig, and V. Toepoel. 2019. “Doing a Time Use Survey on Smartphones Only: What Factors Predict Nonresponse at Different Stages of the Survey Process?” Survey Research Methods 13: 195–213. DOI: https://doi.org/10.18148/srm/2019.v13i2.7385.

23.

Freese, J. and A. Branigan. 2012. “Cognitive Skills and Survey Nonresponse –– Evidence from Two Longitudinal Studies in the United States.” EurAmerica 42: 221–247. Available at: https://www.ea.sinica.edu.tw/eu_file/134009378914.pdf.

24.

Galesic, M. 2006. “Dropouts on the Web: Effects of Interest and Burden Experienced during an Online Survey.” Journal of Official Statistics 22: 313–328. Available at: https://www.scb.se/contentassets/ca21efb41fee47d293bbee5bf7be7fb3/dropouts-onthe-web-effects-of-interest-and-burden-experienced-during-an-online-survey.pdf

25.

Galesic, M., and M. Bosnjak. 2009. “Effects of Questionnaire Length on Participation and Indicators of Response Quality in a Web Survey.” Public Opinion Quarterly 73: 349–360. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/poq/nfp031.

26.

Geisen, E., and J.R. Bergstrom. 2017. Usability Testing for Survey Research. Burlington, MA: Morgan Kaufmann.

27.

Groves, R., S. Presser, and S. Dipko. 2004. “The Role of Topic Interest in Survey Participation Decisions.” Public Opinion Quarterly 68: 2–31. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/poq/nfh002.

28.

Guidry, K.R. 2012. “Response Quality and Demographic Characteristics of Respondents Using a Mobile Device on a Web-Based Survey?” Presentation at the American Association for Public Opinion Research’s 67th Annual Conference. May 18, Orlando, FL, U.S.A. Available at: https://www.aapor.org/AAPOR_Main/media/AnnualMeeting-Proceedings/2012/01_KRGuidry_F1_Mobile-Device-Respondents.pdf (accessed March 2022).

29.

Gummer, T., and J. Daikeler. 2020. “A Note on How Prior Survey Experience with Self-Administered Panel Surveys Affects Attrition in Different Modes.” Social Science Computer Review 38: 490–498. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0894439318816986.

30.

Haraldsen, G. 2004. “Searching for Response Burdens in Focus Groups with Business Respondents.” In Proceedings of the QUEST 2003: Proceedings of the 4th Conference on Questionnaire Evaluation Standards, 21-23 October 2003, edited by P. Prüfer, M. Rexroth, and F.J.J. Fowler: 13–123. Mannheim: Zentrum für Umfragen, Methoden und Analysen -ZUMA-. Available at: https://nbn-resolving.org/urn:nbn:de:0168-ssoar-49200-6 (accessed August 2021).

31.

Harder, V.S., E.A. Stuart, and J.C. Anthony. 2010. “Propensity Score Techniques and the Assessment of Measured Covariate Balance to Test Causal Associations in Psychological Research.” Psychological Methods 15: 234–249. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1037/a0019623.

32.

Hayes, A.F. 2017. Introduction to Mediation, Moderation, and Conditional Process Analysis. New York, NY: The Guilford Press.

33.

Herzing, J.M.E. 2019. Mobile Web Surveys. FORS Guide No. 01, Version 1.0. Lausanne: Swiss Centre of Expertise in the Social Sciences FORS. DOI: https://doi.org/10.24449/FG-2019-00001.

34.

Hill, D.H. and R.J. Willis. 2001. “Reducing Panel Attrition. A Search for Effective Policy Instruments.” Journal of Human Resources 26: 416–438. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/3069625.

35.

Hoogendoorn, A.W., and D. Sikkel. 1998. “Response Burden and Panel Attrition.” Journal of Official Statistics 14: 189–205. Available at: https://www.scb.se/contentassets/ca21efb41fee47d293bbee5bf7be7fb3/response-burden-and-panel-attrition.pdf

36.

Hox, J., E.D. de Leeuw, and T. Klausch. 2017. “Mixed Mode Research: Issues in Design and Analysis.” In Total survey error in practice edited by P.P. Biemer, E.D. de Leeuw, S. Eckman, B. Edwards, F. Kreuter, L.E. Lyberg, N.C. Tucker, and B.T. West: 511–530. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/9781119041702.ch23.

37.

Jäckle, A., J. Burton, M.P. Couper, and C. Lessof. 2019. “Participation in a Mobile App Survey to Collect Expenditure Data as Part of a Large-Scale Probability Household Panel: Coverage and Participation Rates and Biases.” Survey Research Methods 13: 23–44. DOI: https://doi.org/10.18148/srm/2019.v1i1.7297

38.

Jäckle, A., A. Gaia, and M. Benzeval. 2018. The Use of New Technologies to Measure Socioeconomic and Environmental Concepts in Longitudinal Studies. CLOSER Resource report. London, UK: UCL, Closer, Institute of Education. Available at: https://www.closer.ac.uk/wp-content/uploads/CLOSER-resource-The-use-of-new-technology-to-measure-socio-economic-and-environmental-concepts.pdf (accessed March 2022).

39.

Jacobsen, J. and S. Kühne. 2021. Using a Mobile App When Surveying Highly Mobile Populations: Panel Attrition, Consent, and Interviewer Effects in a Survey of Refugees. Social Science Computer Review 39: 721–743. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0894439320985250.

40.

Johnson, A., F. Kelly, and S. Stevens. 2012. “Modular Survey Design for Mobile Devices.” Presentation at the CASRO Online Conference 2012, March 7–8, Las Vegas, NE, U.S.A. Available at: https://c.ymcdn.com/sites/www.casro.org/resource/collection/E270CC91-6B72-4C37-BCC0-5503/CBB66C55/Paper_-_Frank_Kelly_and_Alex_-Johnson_-_Lightspeed_Research_and_Kantar_Operations.pdf.

41.

Kalton, G., J. Lepkowski, G.E. Montanari, and D. Maligalig. 1990. “Characteristics of Second Wave Nonrespondents in a Panel Survey.” In Proceedings of the Survey Research Methods Section: American Statistical Association: 462–467. In JSM Proceedings, Survery Research Methods Section. Alexandria, VA, U.S.A. Available at: http://www.asasrms.org/Proceedings/y1990f.html (accessed August 2021).

42.

Keusch, F., B. Struminskaya, C. Antoun, M.P. Couper, and F. Kreuter. 2019. “Willingness to Participate in Passive Mobile Data Collection.” Public Opinion Quarterly 83: 210–235. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/poq/nfz007.

43.

Keusch, F. and T. Yan. 2017. “Web versus Mobile Web: An Experimental Study of Device Effects and Self-Selection Effects.” Social Science Computer Review 35: 751–769. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0894439316675566.

44.

Klausch, T., J. Hox, and B. Schouten. 2015. “Selection Error in Single- and Mixed Mode Surveys of the Dutch General Population.” Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series A 178: 945–961. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/rssa.12102.

45.

Kleinert, C., B. Christoph, and M. Ruland. 2019. “Experimental Evidence on Immediate and Long-term Consequences of Test-induced Respondent Burden for Panel Attrition.” Sociological Methods and Research: 1–32. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0049124119826145.

46.

Kreuter, F., G.-C. Haas, F. Keusch, S. Bähr, and M. Trappmann. 2018. “Collecting Survey and Smartphone Sensor Data with an App: Opportunities and Challenges Around Privacy and Informed Consent.” Social Science Computer Review 38: 533–549. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0894439318816389.

47.

Laurie, H. 2008. “Handbook of Longitudinal Research: Design, Measurement, and Analysis.” In Minimizing Panel Attrition edited by S. Menard: 167–184. Elsevier.

48.

Laurie, H., R. Smith, and L. Scott. 1999. ‘‘Strategies for Reducing Nonresponse in a Longitudinal Panel Survey.’’ Journal of Official Statistics 15: 269–282.

49.

Lawes, M., C. Hetschko, J.W. Sakshaug, and S. Griessemer. 2021. “Contact Modes and Participation in App-based Smartphone Surveys: Evidence from a Large-scale Experiment.” Social Science Computer Review. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0894439321993832.

50.

Lee, H., S. Kim, M. Couper, and Y. Woo. 2019. “Experimental Comparison of PC Web, Smartphone Web, and Telephone Surveys in the New Technology Era.” Social Science Computer Review 37: 234–247. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0894439318756867.

51.

Lemay, M. 2010. ‘‘Understanding the Mechanism of Panel Attrition.’’ Unpublished Doctoral thesis, Doctor of Philosophy, University of Maryland, College Park, MD.

52.

Lepkowski, J.M. and M.P. Couper. 2002. “Nonresponse in the Second Wave of Longitudinal Household Surveys.” In Survey Nonresponse edited by R.M. Groves, D.A. Dillman, J.E. Eltinge, and R.J.A. Little: 259–272. New York: Wiley.

53.

Link, M.W., J. Murphy, M.F. Schober, T.D. Buskirk, J. Hunter Childs, and C. Langer Tesfaye. 2014. “Mobile Technologies for Conducting, Augmenting and Potentially Replacing Surveys.” Public Opinion Quarterly 78: 779–787. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/poq/nfu054.

54.

Lipps, O. 2009. Attrition of Households and Individuals in Panel Surveys. SOEP- Papers 164. Berlin: DIW. Available at: http://www.diw.de/documents/publikationen/73/diw_01.c.96125.de/diw_sp0164.pdf (accessed March 2022).

55.

Loosveldt, G. and A. Carton. 2001. “An Empirical Test of a Limited Model for Panel Refusals.” International Journal of Public Opinion Research 13:173–185. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/ijpor/13.2.173

56.

Loosveldt, G., J. Pickery, and J. Billiet. 2002. “Item Nonresponse as a Predictor of Unit Nonresponse in a Panel Survey.” Journal of Official Statistics 18: 545–557. Available at: https://www.scb.se/contentassets/ca21efb41fee47d293bbee5bf7be7fb3/item-nonresponse-as-a-predictor-of-unit-nonresponse-in-a-panel-survey.pdf.

57.

Lugtig, P. 2014. “Panel Attrition: Separating Stayers, Fast Attriters, Gradual Attriters, and Lurkers.” Sociological Methods & Research 43: 699–723. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0049124113520305

58.

Lugtig, P. 2021. “What Panel Surveys and Smartphone-App Studies can Learn from Each Other.” Presentation at the 9th Conference of the European Survey Research Association, Online, July 9. Available at: https://www.europeansurveyresearch.org/conferences/program2021?sess=29#218 (accessed March 2022).

59.

Lugtig, P. and V. Toepoel. 2016. “The Use of PCs, Smartphones, and Tablets in a Probability-Based Panel Survey: Effects on Survey Measurement Error.” Social Science Computer Review, 34: 78–94. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0894439315574248.

60.

Lynn, P. 2008. “The Problem of Nonresponse.” In International Handbook of Survey Methodology edited by E.D. de Leeuw, J.J. Hox, and D.A. Dillman: 35–55. New York: Psychology Press.

61.

Lynn, P. 2014. “Longer Interviews May Not Affect Subsequent Survey Participation Propensity.” Public Opinion Quarterly 78: 500–509. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/poq/nfu015.

62.

Marcus, B., M. Bosnjak, S. Lindner, S. Pilischenko, and A. Schütz. 2007. “Compensating for Low Topic Interest and Long Surveys. A Field Experiment on Nonresponse in Web Surveys.” Social Science Computer Review 25: 372–383. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0894439307297606.

63.

Maslovskaya, O., G.B. Durrant, P.W.F. Smith, T. Hanson, and A. Villar. 2019. “What are the Characteristics of Respondents Using Different Devices in Mixed-Device Online Surveys? Evidence from Six UK Surveys.” International Statistical Review 87: 326–346. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/insr.12311.

64.

Mavletova, A. 2013. “Data Quality in PC and Mobile Web Surveys.” Social Science Computer Review 31: 725–743. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0894439313485201.

65.

Mavletova, A. and M.P. Couper. 2013. “Sensitive Topics in PC Web and Mobile WebSurveys: Is there a Difference?” Survey Research Methods 7: 191–205. DOI: https://doi.org/10.18148/srm/2013.v7i3.5458.

66.

Mavletova, A. and M.P. Couper. 2015. “A Meta-Analysis of Breakoff Rates.” In Mobile Research Methods: Opportunities and Challenges of Mobile Research Methodologies edited by D. Toninelli, R. Pinter, and P. Pedraza: 81–98. Ubiquity Press. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5334/bar.f.

67.

Mavletova, A., M.P. Couper, and D. Lebedev. 2018. “Grid and Item-by-Item Formats in PC and Mobile Web Surveys.” Social Science Computer Review 36: 647–668. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0894439317735307.

68.

Mulder, J. and M. de Bruijne. 2019. “Willingness of Online Respondents to Participate in Alternative Modes of Data Collection.” Survey Practice 12: 1–11. DOI: https://doi.org/10.29115/SP-2019-0001.

69.

Office of Management and Budget. 2006. Standards and Guidelines for Statistical Surveys. Executive Office of the President of the United States. Available at: https://unstats.un.org/unsd/dnss/docs-nqaf/USA_standards_stat_surveys.pdf (accessed August 2021).

70.

Olsen, R.J. 2005. “The Problem of Respondent Attrition: Survey Methodology is the Key.” Monthly Labor Review 128: 63–70. Available at: http://www.jstor.org/stable/23804052 (accessed March 2022).

71.

Peytchev, A. 2009. “Survey Breakoff.” Public Opinion Quarterly 73: 74–97. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/poq/nfp014.

72.

Peytchev, A. and C.A. Hill. 2010. “Experiments in Mobile Web Survey Design: Similarities to Other Modes and Unique Considerations.” Social Science Computer Review 28: 319–335. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0894439309353037.

73.

Pinter, R. 2015. “Willingness of Online Access Panel Members to Participate in Smartphone Application-Based Research.” In Mobile Research Methods, edited by D. Toninelli, R. Pinter, and P. de Pedraza: 141–156. London: Ubiquity Press.

74.

Read, B. 2019. “Respondent Burden in a Mobile App: Evidence from a Shopping Receipt Scanning Study.” Survey Research Methods 13: 45–71. DOI: https://doi.org/10.18148/srm/2019.v1i1.7379.

75.

Revilla, M., M.P. Couper, and C. Ochoa. 2019. “Willingness of Online Panelists to Perform Additional Tasks.” Methods, Data, Analyses 13: 223–252. DOI: https://doi.org/10.12758/mda.2018.01.

76.

Revilla, M. and C. Ochoa. 2015. “What are the Links in a Web Survey among Response Time, Quality, and Auto-Evaluation of the Efforts Done?” Social Science Computer Review 33: 97–114. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0894439314531214.

77.

Revilla, M., C. Ochoa, and G. Loewe. 2017. “Using Passive Data from a Meter to Complement Survey Data in Order to Study Online Behavior.” Social Science Computer Review 35: 521–536. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0894439316638457.

78.

Revilla, M., D. Toninelli, and C. Ochoa. 2016. “PCs versus Smartphones in Answering Web Surveys: Does the Device Make a Difference?” Survey Practice 9: 1–6. DOI: https://doi.org/10.29115/sp-2016-0021.

79.

Roberts, C., Vandenplas, C., and J. Herzing. 2020. “A Validation of R-indicators as a Measure of the Risk of Bias using Data from a Non-response Follow-up Survey.” Journal of Official Statistics 36: 675-701. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2478/jos-2020-0034.

80.

Rosenbaum, P.R., and D.B. Rubin. 1983. “The Central Role of the Propensity Score in Observational Studies for Causal Effects.” Biometrika 70: 41–55. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/biomet/70.1.41.

81.

Sakshaug, J.W., and F. Kreuter. 2011. “Using Paradata and Other Auxiliary Data to Examine Mode Switch Nonresponse in a “Recruit-and-Switch” Telephone Survey.” Journal of Official Statistics 27: 339–357. Available at: https://www.scb.se/conten-tassets/ca21efb41fee47d293bbee5bf7be7fb3/using-paradata-and-other-auxiliary-data-to-examine-mode-switch-nonresponse-in-a-34recruit-and-switch34-telephone-survey.pdf.

82.

Sakshaug, J.W., T. Yan, and R. Tourangeau. 2010. “Nonresponse Error, Measurement Error, and Mode of Data Collection: Tradeoffs in a Multi-Mode Survey of Sensitive and Non-Sensitive Items.” Public Opinion Quarterly 74: 907–933. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/poq/nfq057.

83.

Scherpenzeel, A. 2017. “Mixing Online Panel Data Collection with Innovative Methods.” In Methodische Probleme von Mixed-Mode-Ansätzen in der Umfrageforschung [Methodological Problems of Mixed-Mode Approaches in Survey Research], edited by S. Eifler and F. Faulbaum: 27–49. Wiesbaden: Springer.

84.

Stapleton, C.E. 2013. “The Smart(phone) Way to Collect Survey Data.” Survey Practice 6: 1–7. DOI: https://doi.org/10.29115/sp-2013-0011.

85.

Struminskaya, B., K. Weyandt, and M. Bosnjak. 2015. “The Effects of Questionnaire Completion using Mobile Devices on Data Quality. Evidence from a Probability-Based General Population Panel.” Methods, Data, Analyses 9: 261–292. DOI: https://doi.org/10.12758/mda.2015.014.

86.

Struminskaya, B., Toepoel, V., Lutgtig, P., Haan, M., Luiten, A., and B. Schouten. 2021. “Understanding willingness to share smartphone-sensor data.” Public Opinion Quarterly. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/poq/nfaa044.

87.

Toepoel, V. and P. Lugtig. 2015. “Online Surveys are Mixed-Device Surveys. Issues Associated with the Use of Different (Mobile) Devices in Web Surveys.” Methods, Data, Analyses 9: 155–162. DOI: https://doi.org/10.12758/mda.2015.009.

88.

Toepoel, V. and P. Lugtig. 2018. “Modularization in an Era of Mobile Web: Investigating the Effects of Cutting a Survey into Smaller Pieces on Data Quality.” Social Science Computer Review. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0894439318784882.

89.

Tourangeau, R., F.G. Conrad, and M.P. Couper. 2013. The Science of Web Surveys. Oxford, GB: Oxford University Press.

90.

Tresch, A., L. Lauener, L. Bernhard, and L. Scaperrotta. 2020. Selects: Panel Survey (waves 1–3) – 2019 [Dataset]. Distributed by FORS, Lausanne, 2020. www.selects.ch. DOI: https://doi.org/10.23662/FORS-DS-1184-1.

91.

VanderWeele, T.J. 2015. Explanation in Causal Inference: Methods for Mediation and Interaction. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.

92.

VanderWeele, T.J. 2016. “Mediation Analysis: A Practitioner’s Guide.” Annual Review of Public Health 37: 17–32. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-publhealth-032315-021402.

93.

Watson, N. and M. Wooden. 2009. ‘‘Identifying Factors Affecting Longitudinal Survey Response.’’ In Methodology of Longitudinal Surveys edited by P. Lynn: 157–182. Chichester, England: John Wiley.

94.

Wells, T., J.T. Bailey, and M.W Link. 2013. “Filling the Void: Gaining a Better Understanding of Tablet-Based Surveys.” Survey Practice 6: 1–9. DOI: https://doi.org/10.29115/sp-2013-0002.

95.

Wenz, A. 2021. “Do Distractions During Web Survey Completion Affect Data Quality? Findings from a Laboratory Experiment.” Social Science Computer Review 3: 148–161. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0894439319851503.

96.

Wenz, A., A. Jäckle, and M.P. Couper. 2019. “Willingness to Use Mobile Technologies for Data Collection in a Probability Household Panel.” Survey Research Methods 13: 1–22. DOI: https://doi.org/10.18148/srm/2019.v13i1.7298.

97.

Yan, T., S. Fricker, S., and S. Tsai. 2019. “Response Burden: What Predicts It and Who is Burdened Out?” In Advances in Questionnaire Design, Development, Evaluation and Testing edited by P. Beatty, D. Collins, L. Kaye, J.L. Padilla, G. Willis, and A. Wilmot, 193-212. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/9781119263685.ch8.