IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/vrs/offsta/v38y2022i4p987-1017n13.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

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

Author

Listed:
  • Roberts Caroline

    (Institute of Social Sciences, Faculty of Social and Political Sciences University of Lausanne, Bâtiment Géopolis, Quartier Mouline, 1015 Lausanne, Switzerland.)

  • Herzing Jessica M.E.

    (Interfaculty Centre for Educational Research (ICER), University of Bern, Fabrikstrasse 8, 3012 Bern, Switzerland.)

  • Manjon Marc Asensio

    (Institute of Social Sciences, Faculty of Social and Political Sciences University of Lausanne, Bâtiment Géopolis, Quartier Mouline, 1015 Lausanne, Switzerland.)

  • Abbet Philip

    (Idiap Research Institute, Rue Marconi 19, 1920 Martigny, Switzerland. E-mails: philip.abbet@idiap.ch)

  • Gatica-Perez Daniel

    (Idiap Research Institute, Rue Marconi 19, 1920 Martigny, Switzerland. E-mails: philip.abbet@idiap.ch)

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.

Suggested Citation

  • Roberts Caroline & Herzing Jessica M.E. & Manjon Marc Asensio & Abbet Philip & Gatica-Perez Daniel, 2022. "Response Burden and Dropout in a Probability-Based Online Panel Study – A Comparison between an App and Browser-Based Design," Journal of Official Statistics, Sciendo, vol. 38(4), pages 987-1017, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:vrs:offsta:v:38:y:2022:i:4:p:987-1017:n:13
    DOI: 10.2478/jos-2022-0043
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.2478/jos-2022-0043
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.2478/jos-2022-0043?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Daniel H. Hill & Robert J. Willis, 2001. "Reducing Panel Attrition: A Search for Effective Policy Instruments," Journal of Human Resources, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 36(3), pages 416-438.
    2. Thomas Klausch & Joop Hox & Barry Schouten, 2015. "Selection error in single- and mixed mode surveys of the Dutch general population," Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series A, Royal Statistical Society, vol. 178(4), pages 945-961, October.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Teresa Molina Millán & Karen Macours, 2017. "Attrition in randomized control trials: Using tracking information to correct bias," FEUNL Working Paper Series novaf:wp1702, Universidade Nova de Lisboa, Faculdade de Economia.
    2. Kapteyn, Arie & Michaud, Pierre-Carl & Smith, James P. & van Soest, Arthur, 2006. "Effects of Attrition and Non-Response in the Health and Retirement Study," IZA Discussion Papers 2246, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    3. McGovern, Mark E. & Canning, David & Bärnighausen, Till, 2018. "Accounting for non-response bias using participation incentives and survey design: An application using gift vouchers," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 171(C), pages 239-244.
    4. Adrian Chadi, 2019. "Dissatisfied with life or with being interviewed? Happiness and the motivation to participate in a survey," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 53(3), pages 519-553, October.
    5. Michael Fertig & Stefanie Schurer, 2007. "Earnings Assimilation of Immigrants in Germany: The Importance of Heterogeneity and Attrition Bias," SOEPpapers on Multidisciplinary Panel Data Research 30, DIW Berlin, The German Socio-Economic Panel (SOEP).
    6. Frick, Joachim R. & Grabka, Markus M. & Groh-Samberg, Olaf, 2012. "Dealing With Incomplete Household Panel Data in Inequality Research," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 41(1), pages 89-123.
    7. Thomas, Duncan & Witoelar, Firman & Frankenberg, Elizabeth & Sikoki, Bondan & Strauss, John & Sumantri, Cecep & Suriastini, Wayan, 2012. "Cutting the costs of attrition: Results from the Indonesia Family Life Survey," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 98(1), pages 108-123.
    8. Frethey-Bentham, Catherine, 2011. "Pseudo panels as an alternative study design," Australasian marketing journal, Elsevier, vol. 19(4), pages 281-292.
    9. Andrew Dabalen & Alvin Etang & Johannes Hoogeveen & Elvis Mushi & Youdi Schipper & Johannes von Engelhardt, 2016. "Mobile Phone Panel Surveys in Developing Countries," World Bank Publications - Books, The World Bank Group, number 24595.
    10. Joachim R. Frick & Markus M. Grabka, 2007. "Item Non-response and Imputation of Annual Labor Income in Panel Surveys from a Cross-National Perspective," Discussion Papers of DIW Berlin 736, DIW Berlin, German Institute for Economic Research.
    11. Molina Millán, Teresa & Macours, Karen, 2017. "Attrition in Randomized Control Trials: Using Tracking Information to Correct Bias," IZA Discussion Papers 10711, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    12. Banks, James & Muriel, Alastair & Smith, James P., 2010. "Attrition and Health in Ageing Studies: Evidence from ELSA and HRS," IZA Discussion Papers 5161, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    13. Christine Eisenmann & Bastian Chlond & Clotilde Minster & Christian Jödden & Peter Vortisch, 2019. "Assessing the effects of a mixed-mode design in a longitudinal household travel survey," Transportation, Springer, vol. 46(5), pages 1737-1753, October.
    14. Nicole Watson & Mark Wooden, 2011. "Re-engaging with Survey Non-respondents: The BHPS, SOEP and HILDA Survey Experience," Melbourne Institute Working Paper Series wp2011n02, Melbourne Institute of Applied Economic and Social Research, The University of Melbourne.
    15. repec:zbw:rwirep:0020 is not listed on IDEAS
    16. Regina Riphahn & Oliver Serfling, 2005. "Item non-response on income and wealth questions," Empirical Economics, Springer, vol. 30(2), pages 521-538, September.
    17. Buelens Bart & Van den Brakel Jan A., 2017. "Comparing Two Inferential Approaches to Handling Measurement Error in Mixed-Mode Surveys," Journal of Official Statistics, Sciendo, vol. 33(2), pages 513-531, June.
    18. Fertig, Michael & Schurer, Stefanie, 2007. "Labour Market Outcomes of Immigrants in Germany: The Importance of Heterogeneity and Attrition Bias," IZA Discussion Papers 2915, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    19. Kapteyn, Arie & Michaud, Pierre-Carl & Smith, James P. & van Soest, Arthur, 2006. "Effects of Attrition and Non-Response in the Health and Retirement Study," IZA Discussion Papers 2246, Institute for the Study of Labor (IZA).
    20. Joachim Frick & Kristina Krell, 2011. "Einkommensmessungen in Haushaltspanelstudien für Deutschland: Ein Vergleich von EU-SILC und SOEP," AStA Wirtschafts- und Sozialstatistisches Archiv, Springer;Deutsche Statistische Gesellschaft - German Statistical Society, vol. 5(3), pages 221-248, December.
    21. Loretti I. Dobrescu, 2015. "To Love or to Pay: Savings and Health Care in Older Age," Journal of Human Resources, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 50(1), pages 254-299.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:vrs:offsta:v:38:y:2022:i:4:p:987-1017:n:13. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Peter Golla (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.sciendo.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.