nach oben

Marketing Letters

Erschienen in:

01.02.2018

PLease do not answer if you are reading this: respondent attention in online panels

verfasst von: Leonard J. Paas, Meike Morren

Erschienen in: Marketing Letters | Ausgabe 1/2018

Einloggen

Aktivieren Sie unsere intelligente Suche, um passende Fachinhalte oder Patente zu finden.

search-config

KI-gestützte Suche

Aus

Abstract

This paper reports on the relevance of attention checks for online panels, e.g., M-Turk, SurveyMonkey, SmartSurvey, QualTrics. In two SmartSurvey studies approximately one third of the respondents failed a check that instructed them to skip the question. Attention-enhancing tools reduce this to approximately one fifth. The failure rate is not affected by replacing multiple-item scales with single-item measures. We find that failing the attention check relates to other attention indicators and that decreased attention levels often apply across the length of the survey. In support of relevance, our empirical findings show respondent inattentiveness systematically biases survey responses.

Vorheriger Artikel Should “big food” companies introduce healthier options? The effect of new product announcements on shareholder value

Nächster Artikel Visual attention, buying impulsiveness, and consumer behavior

Sie haben noch keine Lizenz? Dann Informieren Sie sich jetzt über unsere Produkte:

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

über 102.000 Bücher
über 537 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

Automobil + Motoren
Bauwesen + Immobilien
Business IT + Informatik
Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
Finance + Banking
Management + Führung
Marketing + Vertrieb
Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe
Versicherung + Risiko

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Jetzt informieren

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

über 67.000 Bücher
über 340 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

Bauwesen + Immobilien
Business IT + Informatik
Finance + Banking
Management + Führung
Marketing + Vertrieb
Versicherung + Risiko

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Jetzt informieren

Barone, M. J., Lyle, K. B., & Winterich, K. P. (2015). When deal depth doesn’t matter: how handedness consistency influences consumer response behavior to horizontal versus vertical price comparisons. Marketing Letters, 26(2), 213–223.CrossRef

Bergkvist, L., & Rossiter, J. R. (2007). The predictive validity of multiple-item versus single-item measures of the same construct. Journal of Marketing Research, 44(2), 175–184.CrossRef

Berman, J. Z., Levine, E. E., Brach, A., & Small, D. A. (2015). The braggart’s dilemma: on the social rewards and penalties of advertising prosocial behaviour. Journal of Marketing Research, 52(1), 90–104.CrossRef

Billiet, J. B., & McClendon, M. J. (2000). Modeling acquiescence in measurement models for two balanced sets of items. Structural Equation Modeling, 7(4), 608–628.CrossRef

Comley, P. (2005). Understanding the online panelist. ESOMAR. http://www.websm.org/db/12/11356/Bibliography/Understanding_the_online_panellist.

Echambadi, R., & Hess, J. P. (2007). Mean-centering does not alleviate collinearity problems in moderated multiple regression models. Marketing Science, 26(3), 438–445.CrossRef

Emrich, O., & Verhoef, P. C. (2015). The impact of a homogenous versus a prototypical web design on online retail patronage for multichannel providers. International Journal of Research in Marketing, 32(4), 363–374.CrossRef

Holbrook, M. B., & Batra, R. (1987). Assessing the role of emotions as mediators of consumer responses to advertising. Journal of Consumer Research, 14(4), 404–420.CrossRef

Holbrook, A. L., Green, M. C., & Krosnick, J. A. (2003). Telephone versus face-to-face interviewing of national probability samples with long questionnaires. Comparisons of respondent satisficing and social desirability response bias. Public Opinion Quarterly, 67(1), 79–125.CrossRef

Johnson, J. A. (2005). Ascertaining the validity of individual protocols from web-based personality inventories. Journal of Research in Personality, 39(1), 103–129.CrossRef

Kamakura, W. A. (2015). Measure twice and cut once: the carpenter’s rule still applies. Marketing Letters, 26(3), 237–243.CrossRef

Kaminska, O., McCutcheon, A. L., & Billiet, J. (2010). Satisficing among reluctant respondents in a cross-national context. Public Opinion Quarterly, 74(5), 956–984.CrossRef

Kapelner, A., & Chandler, D. (2010). Preventing satisficing in online surveys: a “Kapcha” to ensure higher quality data. San Francisco: Paper presented at the Crowd Conference.

Krosnick, J. A. (1991). Response strategies for coping with the cognitive demands of attitude measures in surveys. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 5, 213–236.CrossRef

Krosnick, J. A. (1999). Survey research. Annual Review Psychology, 50, 537–567.CrossRef

Malhotra, N. (2008). Completion time and response order effects in web surveys. Public Opinion Quarterly, 72(5), 914–934.CrossRef

Martin, C. L. (1994). The impact of topic interest on mail survey response behavior. Journal of the Marketing Research Society, 36(4), 327–338.

Meade, A. W., & Craig, S. B. (2012). Identifying careless responses in survey data. Psychological Methods, 17(3), 437–455.CrossRef

Oppenheimer, D. M., Meyvis, T., & Davidenko, N. (2009). Instructional manipulation checks: detecting satisficing to increase statistical power. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 45, 867–972.CrossRef

Putrevu, S., & Lord, K. (1994). Comparative and non-comparative advertising: Attitudinal effects under cognitive and affective involvement conditions. Journal of Advertising, 23(2), 77–91.CrossRef

Rossiter, J. R. (2002). The C-OAR-SE procedure for scale development in marketing. International Journal for Research in Marketing, 19(4), 305–335.CrossRef

Van Herk, H., Poortinga, Y. H., & Verhallen, T. M. M. (2004). Response styles in rating scales: evidence of method bias in data from six EU countries. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 35(3), 346–360.CrossRef

Weijters, B., Baumgartner, H. and Schillewaert (2013). Reversed item bias: an integrative model. Psychological Methods, 18(3), 320–334.

Zhang, C., & Conrad, F. G. (2013). Speeding in web suveys: the tendency to answer very fast and its association with straightlining. Survey Research Methods, 8(2), 127–135.

Titel: PLease do not answer if you are reading this: respondent attention in online panels
verfasst von: Leonard J. Paas
Meike Morren
Publikationsdatum: 01.02.2018
Verlag: Springer US
Erschienen in: Marketing Letters / Ausgabe 1/2018
Print ISSN: 0923-0645
Elektronische ISSN: 1573-059X
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11002-018-9448-7

Springer Professional

Abstract

Bitte loggen Sie sich ein, um Zugang zu Ihrer Lizenz zu erhalten.

Sie haben noch keine Lizenz? Dann Informieren Sie sich jetzt über unsere Produkte:

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft"

Weitere Artikel der Ausgabe 1/2018

Are rival team fans a curse for home team sponsors? The moderating effects of fit, oppositional loyalty, and league sponsoring

Visual attention, buying impulsiveness, and consumer behavior

When the purpose lies within: Maximizers and satisfaction with autotelic choices

Place the good after the bad: effects of emotional shifts on consumer memory

Risking the self: the impact of self-esteem on negative word-of-mouth behavior

Are two brands better than one? Investigating the effects of co-branding in advertising on audience memory