Show simple item record

[journal article]

dc.contributor.authorBethlehem, Jelkede
dc.date.accessioned2016-02-22T15:52:35Z
dc.date.available2016-02-22T15:52:35Z
dc.date.issued2015de
dc.identifier.issn1864-3361de
dc.identifier.urihttp://www.ssoar.info/ssoar/handle/document/46235
dc.description.abstract"There is a growing discussion about the use of non-probability sampling in survey research. Probability sampling is the preferred method of sample selection, but practical problems like reduced data collection budgets, increasing nonresponse rates, and lack of adequate sampling frames force researchers to use different sampling methods. Particularly, online surveys based on self-selection of respondents have become very popular. Some say that use of such alternative sampling methods is not without risks as often proper inference from sample to population is not possible. Others say that non-probability sampling can produce satisfactory estimates provided effective correction techniques are applied. To obtain more insight in various sample selection methods, it would be nice to be able to compare them in practical situations. This paper describes a case in which three different surveys were carried out on the same topic, at the same time, and with the same questionnaire, but with different sample selection methods: an online panel based on probability sampling, an online survey based on self-selection, and a face-to-face survey in shopping centers. The results of these three polls differ substantially. This is a warning to be careful when choosing a sample selection method." (author's abstract)en
dc.languageende
dc.subject.ddcSozialwissenschaften, Soziologiede
dc.subject.ddcSocial sciences, sociology, anthropologyen
dc.titleEssay: Sunday shopping - the case of three surveysde
dc.description.reviewbegutachtet (peer reviewed)de
dc.description.reviewpeer revieweden
dc.source.journalSurvey Research Methods
dc.source.volume9de
dc.publisher.countryDEU
dc.source.issue3de
dc.subject.classozErhebungstechniken und Analysetechniken der Sozialwissenschaftende
dc.subject.classozMethods and Techniques of Data Collection and Data Analysis, Statistical Methods, Computer Methodsen
dc.subject.thesozUmfrageforschungde
dc.subject.thesozsurvey researchen
dc.subject.thesozStichprobede
dc.subject.thesozsampleen
dc.subject.thesozZufallsauswahlde
dc.subject.thesozrandom sampleen
dc.subject.thesozWahrscheinlichkeitde
dc.subject.thesozprobabilityen
dc.subject.thesozAntwortverhaltende
dc.subject.thesozresponse behavioren
dc.subject.thesozSelektionsverfahrende
dc.subject.thesozselection procedureen
dc.subject.thesozOnline-Befragungde
dc.subject.thesozonline surveyen
dc.subject.thesozSchätzungde
dc.subject.thesozestimationen
dc.subject.thesozInterviewde
dc.subject.thesozinterviewen
dc.rights.licenceDeposit Licence - Keine Weiterverbreitung, keine Bearbeitungde
dc.rights.licenceDeposit Licence - No Redistribution, No Modificationsen
internal.statusformal und inhaltlich fertig erschlossende
internal.identifier.thesoz10040714
internal.identifier.thesoz10037472
internal.identifier.thesoz10063008
internal.identifier.thesoz10061922
internal.identifier.thesoz10035808
internal.identifier.thesoz10057772
internal.identifier.thesoz10037911
internal.identifier.thesoz10057146
internal.identifier.thesoz10037913
dc.type.stockarticlede
dc.type.documentZeitschriftenartikelde
dc.type.documentjournal articleen
dc.source.pageinfo221-230de
internal.identifier.classoz10105
internal.identifier.journal674
internal.identifier.document32
internal.identifier.ddc300
dc.identifier.doihttps://doi.org/10.18148/srm/2015.v9i3.6202de
dc.description.pubstatusVeröffentlichungsversionde
dc.description.pubstatusPublished Versionen
internal.identifier.licence3
internal.identifier.pubstatus1
internal.identifier.review1
internal.check.abstractlanguageharmonizerCERTAIN


Files in this item

FilesSizeFormatView

There are no files associated with this item.

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record