CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 2,932Survey Methodology and NonresponseMobile Crowdsensing and CrowdsourcingFocus Groups and Qualitative Methods

Should We Trust Web-Based Studies? A Comparative Analysis of Six Preconceptions About Internet Questionnaires.

Gosling, Samuel D., Vazire, Simine, Srivastava, Sanjay, John, Oliver P.·2004·American Psychologist
DOI 10.1037/0003-066x.59.2.93
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

The rapid growth of the Internet provides a wealth of new research opportunities for psychologists. Internet data collection methods, with a focus on self-report questionnaires from self-selected samples, are evaluated and compared with traditional paper-and-pencil methods. Six preconceptions about Internet samples and data quality are evaluated by comparing a new large Internet sample (N = 361,703) with a set of 510 published traditional samples. Internet samples are shown to be relatively diverse with respect to gender, socioeconomic status, geographic region, and age. Moreover, Internet findings generalize across presentation formats, are not adversely affected by nonserious or repeat responders, and are consistent with findings from traditional methods. It is concluded that Internet methods can contribute to many areas of psychology.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1037/0003-066x.59.2.93

Cites

70 of 70 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • The proportion of females (62%) to males in this study was more representative than in traditional survey methods, where women often comprise 71% to 77% of participants.

    “The proportion of females (62%) to males in this study was more representative than in traditional survey methods, where women often comprise 71% to 77% of the participants [39]”

    From Effects of Mock Facebook Workday Comments on Public Perception of Professional Credibility: A Field Study in Canada (2019) · cites this paper as [39]

  • Self-presentation is an unlikely confound in Study 1 because the motivation to self-present is absent when participants feel anonymous, as they do in anonymous online studies.

    “Self-presentation is an unlikely confound in Study 1 because the motivation to self-present is absent when participants feel anonymous (Paulhus, 1984(Paulhus, , 1991) ) as they do in anonymous online studies such as the present one, where they don't provide identifying information (Gosling et al., 2004).”

    From Cultural norm fulfillment, interpersonal belonging, or getting ahead? A large-scale cross-cultural test of three perspectives on the function of self-esteem. (2015) · cites this paper as Gosling et al., 2004

  • The reliability and validity of internet data collection has become increasingly clear in recent years.

    “As described in the Appendix, the reliability and validity of internet data collection has become increasingly clear in recent years.”

    From Spacing Effects in Learning: A Temporal Ridgeline of Optimal Retention (2008) · cites this paper as Gosling et al., 2004

  • The validity of internet testing has been well supported in recent reviews, with excellent correspondence between results obtained with internet samples and results obtained in the laboratory.

    “The validity of internet testing has been well supported in recent reviews (Gosling et al., 2004), with excellent correspondence between results obtained with internet samples are results obtained in the laboratory (e.g., Birnbaum, 1999;Krantz & Dalal, 2000;McGraw, Tew, & Williams, 2000;Reips, 2002).”

    From Spacing Effects in Learning: A Temporal Ridgeline of Optimal Retention (2008) · cites this paper as Gosling et al., 2004

  • Previous research has suggested populations for online studies and Facebook are quite representative.

    “Furthermore, previous research has suggested populations for online studies and Facebook are quite representative [23], [24].”

    From Personality, Gender, and Age in the Language of Social Media: The Open-Vocabulary Approach (2013) · cites this paper as [23]

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

2 of the 72 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Gosling, S. D., Vazire, S., Srivastava, S., & John, O. P.
Affiliations
  • The University of Texas at Austin (US)
  • Stanford University (US)
  • University of California, Berkeley (US)
ORCID
Venue
American Psychologist
Publisher
American Psychological Association (APA)
Published
2004
Volume
59
Issue
2
Pages
93-104
ISSN
  • 0003-066X (ISSN-L)
  • 1935-990X
DOI
10.1037/0003-066x.59.2.93
OpenAlex
W1992490637
Cited by
2,932
References
72
Citations by year
2026: 40 · 2025: 64 · 2024: 72 · 2023: 85 · 2022: 123 · 2021: 135 · 2020: 157 · 2019: 163 · 2018: 148 · 2017: 170 · 2016: 181 · 2015: 192 · 2014: 218 · 2013: 184 · 2012: 189
FWCI
261.73
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • American Psychologist (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Survey Methodology and Nonresponse
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Science Applications › Mobile Crowdsensing and Crowdsourcing
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Focus Groups and Qualitative Methods
Keywords
online data collection, paper-and-pencil questionnaires, sample representativeness, data quality, response format effects, generalizability, self-report questionnaire
MeSH terms
Adult, Aged, Attitude, Female, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Psychology, Surveys and Questionnaires, Evidence-Based Medicine, Internet

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review