Cited by 1,315Survey Methodology and NonresponseSurvey Sampling and Estimation TechniquesCensus and Population Estimation

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 37 of the 37 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Selection Bias in Web Surveys

Open access
Bethlehem, Jelke·2010·International Statistical Review

Abstract

Summary: At first sight, web surveys seem to be an interesting and attractive means of data collection. They provide simple, cheap, and fast access to a large group of potential respondents. However, web surveys are not without methodological problems. Specific groups in the populations are under‐represented because they have less access to Internet. Furthermore, recruitment of respondents is often based on self‐selection. Both under‐coverage and self‐selection may lead to biased estimates. This paper describes these methodological problems. It also explores the effect of various correction techniques (adjustment weighting and use of reference surveys). This all leads to the question whether properly design web surveys can be used for data collection. The paper attempts to answer this question. It concludes that under‐coverage problems may solve itself in the future, but that self‐selection leads to unreliable survey outcomes.

Overview

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 · 10.1111/j.1751-5823.2010.00112.x

Cites

37 of 37 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

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.

Citations

Cites

Show all 37 references

Research works printed but not linked: 20

  1. Bethlehem J.G., 1988, Reduction of the nonresponse bias through regression estimation, J. Official Statist., 4, 251
  2. Bethlehem J.G., 2002, Survey Nonresponse
  3. Bethlehem J.G., 2009, The Rise of Survey Sampling
  4. Börsch‐Supan A., 2004, Correcting the Participation Bias in an Online Survey
  5. Bowley A.L., 1926, Measurement of the precision attained in sampling, Bull. Int. Statist. Inst., 6
  6. Cobben F., 2004, Nonresponse Correction Techniques in Household Surveys at Statistics Netherlands: a CAPI‐CATI Comparison
  7. Cochran W.G., 1953, Sampling Techniques
  8. Cochran W.G., 1977, Sampling Techniques
  9. De Haan J., 2006, Jaarboek ICT en Samenleving, De Digitale Generatie
  10. Eurostat, 2007, More than 40% of Households have Broadband Internet Access
  11. Hansen M.H., 1953, Survey Sampling Methods and Theory
  12. Kendall M.G., 1960, Where shall the history of statistics begin, Biometrika, 47, 447
  13. Kiaer A. N., 1895, Observations et Expériences Concernant des Dénombrements Représentatives, Bull. Internat. Statist. Inst., 176
  14. Kiaer A. N., 1997, Den Repräsentative Undersökelsesmetode, Christiania Videnskabsselskabets Skrifter. II. Historiskfilosofiske klasse, 4, 37
  15. Kish L., 1967, Survey Sampling
  16. Kuusela V., 2003, Proceedings of the 4th ASC International Conference, 317
  17. 10.1111/j.2397-2335.1934.tb04184.x · DOI
  18. Scherpenzeel A., 2010, Social Research and the Internet: Advances in applied Methods and New Research Strategies
  19. Terhanian G., 2001, Exploiting analytical advances: Minimizing the biases associated with Internet‐based surveys of non‐random samples, ESOMAR Publication Services, 248, 247
  20. Vonk T., 2006, The effects of panel recruitment and management on research results, a study among 19 online panels, ESOMAR Publication Services, 317, 79

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Items 301–400 of 1,000

Metadata

Authors
Bethlehem, J.
Affiliations
Centraal Bureau voor de Statistiek (NL)
Corresponding author
Bethlehem, Jelke
Venue
International Statistical Review
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2010-08
Volume
78
Issue
2
Pages
161-188
ISSN
  • 0306-7734 (ISSN-L)
  • 1751-5823
OpenAlex
W2129332419
Cited by
1,315
References
37
Citations by year
2026: 228 · 2025: 173 · 2024: 151 · 2023: 149 · 2022: 122 · 2021: 144 · 2020: 109 · 2019: 47 · 2018: 38 · 2017: 54 · 2016: 20 · 2015: 32 · 2014: 19 · 2013: 14 · 2012: 6
FWCI
29.95
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • International Statistical Review (publishedVersion)
  • UvA-DARE (University of Amsterdam) (publishedVersion, other-oa)
  • RePEc: Research Papers in Economics (submittedVersion)
  • Data Archiving and Networked Services (DANS) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Survey Methodology and Nonresponse
  • Physical Sciences › Mathematics › Statistics and Probability › Survey Sampling and Estimation Techniques
  • Physical Sciences › Mathematics › Statistics and Probability › Census and Population Estimation
Keywords
online surveys, selection bias, undercoverage, self-selection, internet access, survey design, participant recruitment

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