The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Comparing Data from Online and Face-to-face Surveys
Abstract
This paper explores some of the issues surrounding the use of internet-based methodologies, in particular the extent to which data from an online survey can be matched to data from a face-to-face survey. Some hypotheses about what causes differences in data from online panel surveys and nationally representative face-to-face surveys are discussed. These include: interviewer effect and social desirability bias in face-to-face methodologies; the mode effects of online and face-to-face survey methodologies, including how response scales are used; and differences in the profile of online panellists – both demographic and attitudinal. Parallel surveys were conducted using online panel and face-to-face (CAPI) methodologies, and data were compared before weighting, following demographic weighting and following ‘propensity score weighting ’ – a technique developed by Harris Interactive to correct for attitudinal differences typically found in online respondents. This paper looks at the differences in data from online and face-to-face surveys and puts forward some theories about why these differences might exist. The varying degrees of success of the weighting are also examined.
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
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.
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
Cited by
Bethlehem, J. (2010) · International Statistical Review · doi:10.1111/j.1751-5823.2010.00112.x · Cited by 1,315
Digital inequalities and why they matter
Robinson, L., Cotten, S. R., Ono, H., Quan-Haase, A., Mesch, G., Chen, W., Schulz, J., Hale, T. M., & Stern, M. J. (2015) · Information, Communication & Society · doi:10.1080/1369118x.2015.1012532 · Cited by 1,216
Research synthesis: AAPOR report on online panels
Prepared for the AAPOR Executive Council by a Task Force operating under the auspices of the AAPOR Standards Committee, W. M. I., Baker, R., Blumberg, S. J., Brick, J. M., Couper, M. P., Courtright, M., Dennis, J. M., Dillman, D., Frankel, M. R., Garland, P., et al. (2010) · Public Opinion Quarterly · doi:10.1093/poq/nfq048 · Cited by 584
Szolnoki, G., & Hoffmann, D. (2013) · Wine Economics and Policy · doi:10.1016/j.wep.2013.10.001 · Cited by 419
Examining the antecedents and consequences of mobile app engagement
Kim, S., & Baek, T. H. (2018) · Telematics and Informatics · doi:10.1016/j.tele.2017.10.008 · Cited by 203
Metadata
- Authors
- Duffy, B., Smith, K., Terhanian, G., & Bremer, J.
- Venue
- International Journal of Market Research
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications
- Published
- 2005-11
- Volume
- 47
- Issue
- 6
- Pages
- 615-639
- ISSN
- 1470-7853 (ISSN-L)
- 2515-2173
- OpenAlex
- W2102011792
- Cited by
- 568
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 31.47
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Comparing Data from Online and Face-to-face Surveys. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1177/147078530504700602
- The paper
- Duffy, B., Smith, K., Terhanian, G., & Bremer, J. (2005). Comparing Data from Online and Face-to-face Surveys. International Journal of Market Research. https://doi.org/10.1177/147078530504700602
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.