Cited by 238Survey Methodology and NonresponseSurvey Sampling and Estimation TechniquesMedia and Digital Communication

How much time do you spend online? Understanding and improving the accuracy of self-reported measures of internet use

Open access
Araujo, Theo, Wonneberger, Anke, Neijens, Peter, de Vreese, Claes·2017·Communication Methods and Measures

Abstract

Given the importance of survey measures of online media use for communication research, it is crucial to assess and improve their quality, in particular because the increasingly fragmented and ubiquitous usage of internet complicates the accuracy of self-reported measures. This study contributes to the discussion regarding the accuracy of self-reported internet use by presenting relevant factors potentially affecting biases of self-reports and testing survey design strategies to improve accuracy. Combining automatic tracking data and survey data from the same participants (N = 690) confirmed low levels of accuracy and tendencies of over-reporting. The analysis revealed biases due to a range of factors associated with the intensity of (actual) internet usage, propensity to multitask, day of reference, and the usage of mobile devices. An anchoring technique could not be proved to reduce inaccuracies of reporting behavior. Several recommendations for research practice follow from these findings.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1080/19312458.2017.1317337

Cites

41 of 42 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Araujo, T., Wonneberger, A., Neijens, P., & de Vreese, C.
Affiliations
  • University of Amsterdam (NL)
  • Amsterdam School of Communication Research (ASCoR), University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
Corresponding author
Araujo, Theo
Venue
Communication Methods and Measures
Published
2017-04-27
Volume
11
Issue
3
Pages
173-190
ISSN
  • 1931-2458 (ISSN-L)
  • 1931-2466
OpenAlex
W2608611108
Cited by
237
References
41
Citations by year
2026: 19 · 2025: 30 · 2024: 30 · 2023: 33 · 2022: 27 · 2021: 39 · 2020: 38 · 2019: 14 · 2018: 6 · 2017: 1
FWCI
41.33
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Communication Methods and Measures (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • UvA-DARE (University of Amsterdam) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • Data Archiving and Networked Services (DANS) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
Funders
Research Priority Area Communication, University of Amsterdam (2012-2016)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Survey Methodology and Nonresponse
  • Physical Sciences › Mathematics › Statistics and Probability › Survey Sampling and Estimation Techniques
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Networks and Communications › Media and Digital Communication
Keywords
measurement accuracy, reporting bias, overreporting, survey design, anchoring technique, mobile device use, multitasking, online media use

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