Bilimsel Araştırmalarda İnternet Temelli Anketlerin Kullanımı: Akademisyenlerin Görüş, Tercih ve Kaygıları

Year 2022, Volume: 23 Issue: 1, 1 - 23, 01.06.2022

İnci Dursun Ebru Tümer Kabadayı Hediye Yürüyen

https://doi.org/10.17494/ogusbd.962271

Cited By: 1

Abstract

İnternet kullanımının yaygınlaşması ve son dönemde yaşanan COVID-19 salgınıyla birlikte araştırmalarda internet temelli anketlerin kullanımı artmıştır. İnternet temelli anketler, maliyet, hız, kolaylık açısından avantajlar sağlamaktadır. Ancak yöntemin, veri kalitesini düşürmesi muhtemel bazı sınırlılıkları da mevcuttur. Ülkemizde internet anketlerinin kullanımının oldukça yaygın olmasına rağmen ulusal literatürde bu veri toplama yöntemine dair araştırmalar yok denecek kadar azdır. Bu araştırmanın amacı, internet temelli anketlerin avantaj ve dezavantajlarına dair literatürdeki mevcut bilgiyi özetlemek, ülkemizde yöntemin kullanımına ilişkin mevcut durumu ortaya çıkarmaktadır. Bu kapsamda keşifsel bir araştırma tasarlanmış ve yöntemi kullanan Türk akademisyenlerin yönteme ilişkin görüşleri, tercihleri ve kaygıları incelenmiştir. Türkiye’nin yedi farklı bölgesinde yer alan 50 ilde, toplam 80 farklı üniversitede, farklı bölümlerde çalışan 211 akademisyenden anket yöntemiyle veri toplanmış ve bulgular tartışılmıştır.

Keywords

İnternet Temelli Anket, Çevrim İçi Anket, Veri Toplama Yöntemi, Alan Araştırması

The Use of Online Questionnaires in Scientific Research: Opinions, Preferences and Concerns of Academicians

Abstract

The use of online questionnaires has increased in research due to the spread of internet use and recent COVID-19 pandemic. Online questionnaires provide advantages in terms of cost, speed, and convenience. However, there are some limitations of the method that may reduce the data quality. Although online questionnaires are quite common in Turkey, there is almost no research on this method in the national literature. The primary purpose of this research is to summarize the current information in the literature on the advantages and disadvantages of the method and to explore the current situation regarding the use of the method in Turkey. In this context an exploratory research was designed to investigate Turkish academicians' opinions, preferences, and concerns, who used the online questionnaires. An online survey was run with 211 academicians working in different departments of 80 universities located in 50 cities from Turkey's seven distinct geographical regions, and findings are discussed.

Keywords

Internet Based Questionnaires, Online Questionnaires, Data Collection Method, Survey

References

• Alessi, E. J. ve Martin, J. I. (2010). Conducting an internet-based survey: Benefits, pitfalls, and lessons learned. Social Work Research, 34(2), 122-128.
• Andreadis, I. (2015). Web surveys optimized for smartphones: Are there differences between computer and smartphone users?. Methods, Data, Analyses, 9(2), 16.
• Bachmann, D. P., Elfrink, J. ve Vazzana, G. (2000). Email and snail mail face off in rematch. Marketing Research, 11(4), 10-15.
• Bachmann, S. ve Moroney, W. F. (2005). A consumer’s guide to free ınternet questionnaire development tools. Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Annual Meeting, 49(24), 2085-2089.
• Beidernikl, G. ve Kerschbaumer, A. (2007). Sampling in online surveys. R.A. Reynolds, R. Woods, J.D. Baker (Ed.), Handbook of Research on Electronic Surveys and Measurement içinde (90-96. ss.). IGI: Global.
• Buchanan, E. A. ve Hvizdak, E. E. (2009). Online survey tools: Ethical and methodological concerns of human research ethics committees. Journal of Empirical Research on Human Research Ethics: An International Journal, 4(2), 37-48.
• Buskirk, T. D. ve Andrus, C. (2012). Smart surveys for smart phones: Exploring various approaches for conducting online mobile surveys via smartphones. Survey Practice, 5(1).
• Callegaro, M. (2010). Do you know which device your respondent has used to take your online survey. Survey Practice, 3(6), 1-12.
• Conn, K. M., Mo, C. H. ve Sellers, L. M. (2019). When less is more in boosting survey response rates. Social Science Quarterly, 100(4), 1445-1458.
• Coopersmith, J., Vogel, L. K., Bruursema, T. ve Feeney, K. (2016). Effects of incentive amount and type of web survey response rates. Survey Practice, 9(1), 4463-4474.
• Couper, M. P. (2000). Web surveys: A review of issues and approaches. The Public Opinion Quarterly, 64(4), 464-494.
• Couper, M. P. Traugott, M. ve Lamias, M. (2001). Web survey design and administration. Public Opinion Quarterly, 65, 230-253.
• Couper, M. P., Tourangeau, R., Conrad, F. G. ve Crawford, S. D. (2004). What they see is what we get: Response options for web surveys. Social Science Computer Review, 22, 111-127.
• Couper, M. P. ve Peterson, G. J. (2016). Why do web surveys take longer on smartphones?. Social Science Computer Review, 1-21.
• De Bruijne, M. ve Wijnant, A. (2013). Can mobile web surveys be taken on computers? A discussion on a multi-device survey design. Survey Practice, 6(4), 1-8.
• Dommeyer, C. J., Baum, P. ve Hanna, R. W. (2002). College students' attitudes toward methods of collecting teaching evaluations: In-class versus on-line. Journal of Education for Business, 78(1), 11-15.
• Dommeyer, C. J., Baum, P., Hanna, R. W. ve Chapman, K. S. (2004). Gathering faculty teaching evaluations by in‐class and online surveys: Their effects on response rates and evaluations. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 29(5), 611-623.
• Dursun, İ., Kabadayı, E. T. ve Durmaz, A. (2019). When to consider social desirability bias (SDB) in consumer behavior studies? A review on SDB-vulnerable concepts. D. Fırat, O.Yılmaz, D. Smilkova (Ed.), Business & Management Practices içinde (233-256. ss.). IJOPEC Publication.
• Evans, J. R. ve Mathur, A. (2005). The value of online surveys. Internet Research.
• Fabo, B. ve Kahanec, M. (2018). Can a voluntary web survey be useful beyond explorative research?. International Journal of Social Research Methodology, 21(5), 591-601.
• Fricker, R. D. ve Schonlau, M. (2002). Advantages and disadvantages of internet research surveys: Evidence from the Literature. Field Methods, 14(4), 347-367.
• Frippiat, D., Marquis, N. ve Wiles-Portier, E. (2010). Web surveys in the social sciences: An overview. Population, 65(2), 285-311.
• Guidry, K. R. (2012). Response quality and demographic characteristics of respondents using a mobile device on a web-based survey. In AAPOR Annual Conference, May.
• Hox, J. J., De Leeuw, E. D. ve Zijlmans, E. A. (2015). measurement equivalence in mixed mode surveys. Frontiers in Psychology, 6, 1-11.
• Huffman, I. (2006). Online questionnaire software advantages/disadvantages. The University of North Carolina.
• Jäckle, A., Roberts, C. ve Lynn, P. (2010). Assessing the effect of data collection mode on measurement. International Statistical Review, 78(1), 3-20.
• Jansen, K. J., Corley, K. G. ve Jansen, B. J. (2007). E-survey methodology. R.A. Reynolds, R. Woods, J.D. Baker (Ed.), Handbook of Research on Electronic Surveys and Measurement içinde (1-8. ss.). IGI: Global.
• Keusch, F. ve Yan, T. (2017). Web versus mobile web: An experimental study of device effects and self-selection effects. Social Science Computer Review, 35(6), 751-769.
• Kittleson, M. J. (1997). Determining effective follow-up of e-mail surveys. American Journal of Health Behavior, 21(3), 193-196.
• Kolbas, V. (2015). The measurement effect in PC smartphone and tablet surveys. In ESRA Biannual Conference, Reykjavik, Iceland.
• Lai, J., Vanno, L., Link, M., Pearson, J., Makowska, H., Benezra, K. ve Green, M. (2009). Life360: Usability of mobile devices for time use surveys. In American Association for Public Opinion Research Annual Conference, Hollywood, FL.
• Lumsden, J. (2007). Online-questionnaire design guidelines. R.A. Reynolds, R. Woods, J.D. Baker (Eds.), Handbook of Research on Electronic Surveys and Measurement içinde (44-64. ss.). IGI: Global.
• Ma, Q. ve McCord M. (2007). Web Survey Design. R.A. Reynolds, R. Woods, J.D. Baker (Ed.), Handbook of Research on Electronic Surveys and Measurement içinde (9-18. ss.). IGI: Global.
• Magro, M. J., Prybutok, V. R. ve Ryan, S. D. (2015). How survey administration can affect response in electronic surveys. Quality & Quantity, 49(5), 2145-2154.
• Manfreda, K. L., Bosnjak, M., Berzelak, J., Haas, I. ve Vehovar, V. (2008). web surveys versus other survey modes: A meta-analysis comparing response rates. International Journal of Market Research, 50(1), 79-104.
• Marra, R.M. ve Bogue, B. (2006). A critical assessment of online survey tools. Women in Engineering ProActive Network
• Mavletova, A. (2013). Data quality in PC and mobile web surveys. Social Science Computer Review, 31(6), 725-743.
• McClain, C., Crawford, S. D. ve Dugan, J. P. (2012). Use of mobile devices to access computer-optimized web instruments: Implications for respondent behavior and data quality. In Annual Meeting of the American Association for Public Opinion Research, May, Orlando, FL.
• Menachemi, N. (2011). Assessing response bias in a web survey at a university faculty. Evaluation & Research in Education, 24(1), 5-15.
• Miller, T. W. (2001). Can we trust the data of online research?. Marketing Research, 13(2), 26.
• Monroe, M. C. ve Adams, D. C. (2012). Increasing response rates to web-based surveys. Journal of Extension, 50(6), 6-7.
• Nayak, M. S. D. P. ve Narayan, K. A. (2019). Strengths and weakness of online surveys. IOSR Journal of Humanities and Social Science, 24(5), 31-38.
• Nulty, D. D. (2008). The Adequacy of response rates to online and paper surveys: What can be done?. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 33(3), 301-314.
• Oppenheimer, A. J., Pannucci, C. J., Kasten, S. J., ve Haase, S. C. (2011). Survey says? A primer on web-based survey design and distribution. Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, 128(1), 299-304.
• Perkins, G. H. (2004). Will Libraries' Web-based survey methods replace existing non-electronic survey methods?. Information Technology and Libraries, 23(3), 123.
• Peytchev, A. ve Hill, C. A. (2010). Experiments in mobile web survey design: Similarities to other modes and unique considerations. Social Science Computer Review, 28(3), 319-335.
• Resiel, J.F. ve Shneiderman, B. (1987). Is bigger better? The effects of display size on program reading. G. Salvendy (Ed.), Social, Ergonomic and Stress Aspects of Work with Computers içinde (113-122. ss.). Amsterdam: Elsevier.
• Roberts, L. (2007a). Opportunities and constraints of electronic research. R.A. Reynolds, R. Woods, J.D. Baker (Ed.), Handbook of Research on Electronic Surveys and Measurement içinde (19-27. ss.). IGI: Global.
• Roberts, L. (2007b). Equivalence of electronic and off-line measures. R.A. Reynolds, R. Woods, J.D. Baker (Eds.), Handbook of Research on Electronic Surveys and Measurement içinde (97-103. ss.). IGI: Global.
• Scott, A., Jeon, S. H., Joyce, C. M., Humphreys, J. S., Kalb, G., Witt, J. ve Leahy, A. (2011). A randomised trial and economic evaluation the effect of response mode on response rate, response bias, and item non-response in a survey of doctors. BMC Medical Research Methodology, 11(1), 126.
• Sheehan, K. ve Hoy, M. (1999). Using e-mail to survey internet users in the United States: Methodology and assessment. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 4(3), 154-165.
• Sheehan, K. B. (2006). E-Mail survey response rates: A review. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 6.
• Singer, E., Groves, R. M. ve Corning, A. D. (1999). Differential incentives: Beliefs about practices, perceptions of equity, and effects an survey participation. The Public Opinion Quarterly, 63(2), 251-260.
• Stern, M., Sterrett, D. ve Bilgen, I. (2016). The Effects of grids on web surveys completed with mobile devices. Social Currents, 3(3), 217-233.
• Stern, M. J., Bilgen, I., McClain, C. ve Hunscher, B. (2017). Effective sampling from social media sites and search engines for web surveys: Demographic and data quality differences in surveys of Google and Facebook users. Social Science Computer Review, 35(6), 713-732.
• Struminskaya, B., Weyandt, K. ve Bosnjak, M. (2015). The effects of questionnaire completion using mobile devices on data quality, evidence from a probability-based general population panel. Methods, Data, Analyses, 9(2), 32.
• Sturgill, A. ve Jongsuwanwattana, P. (2007). Legal and ethical concerns of collecting data online. R.A. Reynolds, R. Woods, J.D. Baker (Ed.), Handbook of Research on Electronic Surveys and Measurement içinde (120-125. ss.). IGI: Global.
• Tourangeau, R., Maitland, A., Rivero, G., Sun, H., Williams, D. ve Yan, T. (2017). Web surveys by smartphone and tablets: Effects on survey responses. Public Opinion Quarterly, 81(4), 896-929.
• Travis, L. (2010). One of many free survey tools: Google Docs. Journal of Electronic Resources in Medical Libraries, 7(2), 105-114.
• TUİK, (2020a). Hanehalkı Bilişim Teknolojileri (BT) Kullanım Araştırması. Erişim adresi https://data.tuik.gov.tr/tr/display-bulletin/?bulletin=hanehalki-bilisim-teknolojileri-bt-kullanim-arastirmasi-2020-33679
• TUİK, (2020b). Hanehalkı Bilişim Teknolojileri (BT) Kullanım Araştırması, İstatistikler. Erişim adresi https://data.tuik.gov.tr/tr/main-category-sub-categories-sub-components2/#
• Van Mol, C. (2017). Improving web survey efficiency: The impact of an extra reminder and reminder content on web survey response. International Journal of Social Research Methodology, 20(4), 317-327.
• Van Selm, M. ve Jankowski, N. W. (2006). Conducting online surveys. Quality and Quantity, 40(3), 435-456.
• Watters, C., Duffy, J. ve Duffy, K. (2003). Using large tables on small display devices. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 58(1), 21-37.
• Wells, T., Bailey, J. T. ve Link, M. W. (2014). Comparison of smartphone and online computer survey administration. Social Science Computer Review, 32(2), 238-255.
• Wenz, A. (2017). Completing web surveys on mobile devices: Does screen size affect data quality?. ISER Working Paper Series.
• Wilson, A. ve Laskey, N. (2003). Internet-based marketing research: A serious alternative to traditional research methods?. Marketing Intelligence & Planning, 21(2), 79-84.
• Wright K.B. (2019). Web-based survey methodology. P. Liamputtong (Ed.), Handbook of Research Methods in Health Social Sciences. Singapore: Springer.
• Ye, J. (2007). Overcoming challenges to conducting online surveys. R.A. Reynolds, R. Woods, J.D. Baker (Eds.), Handbook of Research on Electronic Surveys and Measurement içinde (83-89. ss.). IGI: Global.