Longitudinal online survey in well-being research: first experiences from CRO-WELL project
The aim of this report was to analyse positive and negative aspects of online administration of longitudinal well-being survey and to provide suggestions and guidelines for future research. The aim of CRO-WELL (Croatian Longitudinal Well-being Study) research was to follow well-being indicators longitudinally, on a large sample (N>5 000).
For the purpose of the research we developed online platform with integrated questionnaire to assess various variables related to well-being. Participants could assess the application via various browsers, and it was also adjusted for smart phones. “Friendly use” of the online application, understanding of questions and answering method, as well as ethical concerns, was tested using focus groups and individual trials. To enable matching the participants from two waves, every participant had to log in to the web page using his/her e-mail address. While e-mail address was protected by data-base, special computer-programme created token associated with each participant. A year after completing the initial questionnaire, participants were automatically invited to complete the follow-up. This paper brings review of designing and conducting a longitudinal research having in mind advantages and disadvantages of online survey.
Bateman T.S. and Crant M.J., (1993), “The Proactive Component of Organizational Behavio: A Measure and Correlates“ Journal of Organizational Behavior, Vol. 14, No. 2, pg. 103-118.
Bowling A., (2005), “Mode of questionnaire administration can have serious effects on data quality“ Journal of Public Health, Vol. 27, pg. 281-291.
Breunig R. and McKibbin R., (2011), “The effect of survey design on household reporting of financial difficulty“ Journal of the Royal Statistical Society: Series A (Statistics in Society), Vol. 174, No. 4, pg. 991-1005.
Broadhead W. E. Gehlbach S. H. DeGruy F. V. and Kaplan B. H., (1988), “The Duke-UNC Functional Social Support Questionnaire: Measurement of social support in family medicine patients“ Medical Care, Vol. 26, No. 7, pg. 709-723.
Conti G. and Pudney S., (2011), “Survey design and the analysis of satisfaction“ The Review of Economics and Statistics, Vol. 93, No. 3, pg. 1087-1093.
Croatian Bureau of Statistics, (2017), “Usage of information and communication technologies (ICT) in households and by individuals, 2017, first results“, Zagreb.
Croatian Psychological Chamber, (2004) “The Code of Ethics of Psychological Practice“ Available from: http://www.psiholoska-komora.hr/static/documents/dok_kodeks_etike.pdf. [Accessed 25 March,2018]
Cummins R.A., (1996), “The Domains of Life Satisfaction: An Attempt to Order Chaos” Social Indicators Research, Vol. 38, pg. 303-332.
Diener E. Wirtz D. Tov W. Kim-Prieto C. Choi. D. Oishi S. and Biswas-Diener, R., (2009), “New measures of well-being: Flourishing and positive and negative feelings” Social Indicators Research, Vol. 39, pg. 247-266.
Dolan P. and Kavetsos G., (2012), “Happy talk: mode of administration effects on subjective well-being” Journal of Happiness Studies, Vol. 17, No. 3, pg. 1273-129g
Goldberg L. R., (1999), “A broad-bandwidth, public domain, personality inventory measuring the lower-level facets of several five-factor models” In Mervielde I. Deary I. De Fruyt F. and Ostendorf F. (Eds.), “Personality Psychology in Europe, Vol. 7” Tilburg, The Netherlands: Tilburg University Press.
Goodman J.S. and Blum T.C., (1996), “Assessing the non-random sampling effects of subject attrition in longitudinal research“ Journal of Management, Vol. 22, No. 4, pg. 627-652.
Gustavson K. von Soest T. Karevold E. and Røysamb E., (2012), “Attrition and generalizability in longitudinal studies: findings from a 15-year population-based study and a Monte Carlo simulation study” BMC Public Health, Vol. 12, pg. 918
Huppert F. A. Marks N. Clark A. Siegrist J. Stutzer A. Vittersø J. and Wahrendorf M., (2009), “Measuring well-being across Europe: Description of the ESS Well-being Module and preliminary findings“ Social Indicators Research, Vol. 91, No. 3, pg. 301-315.
Joinson A. N. McKenna K. Postmes T. and Reips U.-D., (2007), “The Oxford handbook of Internet psychology“ Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Joinson A. N. Reips U.-D. Buchanan T. and Paine Schofield C., (2010), “Privacy, trust, and self-disclosure online” Human Computer Interaction, Vol. 25, pg. 1–24.
Larsen R. J. and Prizmić Z., (2004), “Affect regulation“ In Baumeister R. and Vohs K. (Eds.), “Handbook of self-regulation research: Research, theory and applications“ New York: Guilford Press.
Leist A.K. Ferring D. and Filipp S.H., (2010), “Remembering positive and negative life events: Associations with future time perspective and functions of autobiographical memory“ GeroPsych: The Journal of Gerontopsychology and Geriatric Psychiatry, Vol. 23, pg.137–147.
Limayem M. Khalifa M. and Frini A., (2000), “What makes consumers buy from Internet? A longitudinal study of online shopping” IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics-Part A: Systems and Humans, Vol. 30, No. 4, pg. 421-432.
Miller R.B. and Wright D.W., (1995), “Detecting and correcting attrition bias in longitudinal family research“ Journal of Marriage and the Family, Vol. 57, No. 4, pg. 921-929.
Presser S. & Stinson L., (1998), “Data collection mode and social desirability bias in self-reported religious attendance” American Sociological Review, Vol. 63, pg. 137-145.
Prizmić Z. and Larsen R.J., (2012), “Life satisfaction and affect regulation strategies”, Book of abstracts, The 16th European Conference on Personality, Trieste, Italy, pg.197.
Rabbitt P. Diggle P. Holland F. and McInnes L., (2004), “Practice and Drop-Out Effects During a 17-Year Longitudinal Study of Cognitive Aging” The Journals of Gerontology: Series B, Vol. 59, No. 2, pg. 84–97
Reips UD., (2013), “Internet-Based Studies” In Gellman M.D. and Turner J.R. (eds) “Encyclopedia of Behavioral Medicine” Springer, New York.
Salgado J. F. and Moscoso S., (2003), “Internet‐based Personality Testing: Equivalence of Measures and Assesses' Perceptions and Reactions” International Journal of Selection and Assessment, Vol. 11, No. 2‐3, pg. 194-205.
Sapp S.G. and Harrod W.J., (1993), “Reliability and Validity of a Brief Version of Levenson's Locus of Control Scale” Psychological Reports, Vol. 72, No. 2, pg. 539-550.
Schmidt W. C., (2007), “Technical considerations when implementing online research“ In Joinson A. N. McKenna K. Postmes T. and Reips U.-D., (2007), “The Oxford handbook of Internet psychology“. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Singh A. Taneja A. and Mangalaraj G., (2009), “Creating online surveys: Some wisdom from the trenches tutorial“ IEEE transactions on Professional Communication, Vol. 52, No. 2, pg. 197-212.
Smith G., (2008), "Does gender influence online survey participation?: A record-linkage analysis of university faculty online surveyresponse behavior" ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 501717
Tourangeau R. and Smith T.W., (1996), “Asking sensitive questions: The impact of data collection mode, question format, and question context“ Public Opinion Quarterly, Vol. 60, pg. 275-304.
Copyright (c) 2018 MSc. Lana Lučić, Dr. Sc. Tihana Brkljačić, Dr. Sc. Ljiljana Kaliterna Lipovčan
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:
- Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution (CC-BY) License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (SeeThe Effect of Open Access).