1 / 15

Web survey software

Web survey software. Ana Slavec, Vasja Vehovar, Nejc Berzelak and Katja Lozar Manfreda University of Ljubljana, Slovenia COST WEBDATANET Meeting Amsterdam, November 30 2011. Web Survey Methodology website. http://www.websm.org WebSM site launched in 1998 at the University of Ljubljana

evan-hopkins
Télécharger la présentation

Web survey software

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Web survey software Ana Slavec, Vasja Vehovar, Nejc Berzelak and Katja Lozar Manfreda University of Ljubljana, Slovenia COST WEBDATANET Meeting Amsterdam, November 30 2011

  2. Web Survey Methodology website • http://www.websm.org • WebSM site launched in 1998 at the University of Ljubljana • 2003-2005: Redesign (5th EU Framework Program) • After 2005: All essential components being updated • 2009 AAPOR Warren J. Mitofsky Innovators Award • Some statistics: • 6087 authors • 5700+ bibliographic records (books, papers, conference presentations, etc.) • 400+ online survey software tools

  3. http://www.websm.org

  4. WebSM Software Database • Software on WebSM since 2005: • http://www.websm.org/c/1283/Software/ • More than 400 software tools listed • Planned extensive evaluation and redesign in three steps: • Analysis of observations based on filled evaluation form (without hand-on testing) for all products:http://www.1ka.si/websm&preview=on • Testing low-price end software (easily accessible) - see draft evaluation form: http://www.1ka.si/a/10197&preview=on • Testing advanced solutions (expensive, hardly accessible)

  5. I. Basic observations • 400 software listed with basic observations: • language, code availability, offices in countries, charges, hosting, trial version, sample questionnaires • The 2010 update found the number of newcomers is declining, while many software passed out • The 2011 update extended the list of observations • more details on pricing and languages, website data, social media, features, etc. • http://www.1ka.si/websm&preview=on

  6. - Basic observations: pricing • 44 (12%) tools are free and 320 (88%) are commercial • Two groups: • low price-end pruducts with elaboreated price tables, • high-price-end products where a request for quote need to be submitted

  7. - Basic information: account

  8. - Basic observations: features

  9. - Basic observations: website data http://www.freewebsitereport.org

  10. - Basic observations: social media • 116 software tools have a Facebook profile(~1500 fans on average) • 118 software tools have a Twitter profile(~1300 followers on average) • 52 software tools have a YouTube channel(~56 subscribers on average)

  11. II. Web Survey Software Features Previous research: • Kazcmirek (2006, 2008), • Crafword (2002, 2006), • Zuckerberg (2006), • Vehovar et. al. (2005), • Berzelak (2006), • Macer (2002). • Focus on recruitments/invitations and questionnaire design. Foreseen evaluation : • Questionnaire design • Appearance • Routing • Sample management • Multi-mode support • Data security • Paradata • Data Export • Reporting http://www.1ka.si/a/10197&preview=on

  12. Levels of web software support Web software can support different steps in the survey process: • The weakest point is preparing and drafting the questionnaire: draft versions are often prepared in a word processor and exchanged by e-mail. • Possible solution: Integration of questionnaire preparation and drafting into web survey software from the very first ideas.

  13. Experiment • 16 graduate students working in 4 random groups working on two topics: attituded towards wild animals and sports activities of exchange students • Each group has done each topic in either mode: • Online, using pilot software developed to support required functionalities (except for inline editing) (experimental group) • Offline, using word processor and communicating through e-mail, online groups (control group) • Results: • No significant differences in time spent • Users were much more satisfied with online mode • More about the experiment (presentation at ISM Workshop): • http://workshop.websm.org/uploadi/editor/1314653351Websurveysoftware_final.pdf

  14. Ideas for cooperation • Analysis of basic observatoins • Feedback on second questionnaire: http://www.1ka.si/a/10197&preview=on • Participation in the evaluation of top software tools (possible COST deliverable) • Paper on web survey software: • from eSocialScience (collaboration, teamwork) perspective, or • from web survey software perspective (key features, e.g. Crawford 2006)

  15. More … • About Web Survey Methodology: • http://www.websm.org • About Our University and Faculty: • http://www.uni-lj.si • http://www.fdv.si • About Me: • E-mail: ana@ris.org • LinkedIN: http://www.linkedin.com/in/anaslavec 15

More Related