[.AAPOR (The American Association for Public Opinion Research). 2011. Standard definitions: Final dispositions of case codes and outcome rates for surveys, 7th ed. AAPOR.]Search in Google Scholar
[Alexander, G., G. Divine, M. Couper, J. McClure, M. Stopponi, K. Fortman, D. Tolsma, V. Strecher, and C. Johnson. 2008. “Effect of Incentives and Mailing Features on Online Health Program Enrolment.” American Journal of Preventive Medicine 34: 382-388. Doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.amepre.2008.01.028.10.1016/j.amepre.2008.01.028244273718407004]Search in Google Scholar
[Ansolabehere, S. and B. Schaffner. 2014. “Does Survey Mode Still Matter? Findings From a 2010 Multi-Mode Comparison.” Political Analysis 22: 285-303. Doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/pan/mpt025.10.1093/pan/mpt025]Search in Google Scholar
[Atkeson, L., A. Adams, and R. Alvarez. 2014. “Nonresponse and Mode Effects in Self-and Interviewer-Administered Surveys.” Political Analysis 22: 304-320. Doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/pan/mpt049.10.1093/pan/mpt049]Search in Google Scholar
[Baker, R., S.J. Blumberg, J.M. Brick, M.P. Couper, M. Courtright, J.M. Dennis, D.]Search in Google Scholar
[Dillman, M.R. Frankel, P. Garland, R.M. Groves, C. Kennedy, J. Krosnick, P.J.]Search in Google Scholar
[Lavrakas, S. Lee, M. Link, L. Piekarski, K. Rao, R.K. Thomas, and D. Zahs. 2010. “Research Synthesis AAPOR Report on Online Panels.” Public Opinion Quarterly 74: 711-781. Doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/poq/nfq048.10.1093/poq/nfq048]Search in Google Scholar
[Biemer, P. 1988. “Measuring Data Quality.” In Telephone Survey Methodology, edited by W. Nicholls II, R. Groves, P. Biemer, L. Lyberg, J. Massey, W. Nicholls II, and J. Waksberg, 273-283. New York: Wiley & Sons.]Search in Google Scholar
[Biemer, P. and L. Lyberg. 2003. Introduction to Survey Quality. New York: John Wiley & Sons.10.1002/0471458740]Search in Google Scholar
[Birnholtz, J., D. Horn, T. Finholt, and S. Bae. 2004. “The Effects of Cash, Electronic, and Paper Gift Certificates as Respondent Incentives for a Web-Based Survey of Technologically Sophisticated Respondents.” Social Science Computer Review 22: 355-362. Doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0894439304263147.10.1177/0894439304263147]Search in Google Scholar
[Blumberg, S. and J. Luke. 2013. Wireless Substitution: Early Release of Estimates from the National Health Interview Survey. July-December 2012. Available at: http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/nhis/earlyrelease/wireless201306.pdf (accessed December 2014).]Search in Google Scholar
[Bosnjak, M. 2005. “Effects of Two Innovative Techniques to Apply Incentives in Online Access Panels.” Presentation at the General Online Research Conference (GOR), Zürich, March 22-23.]Search in Google Scholar
[Bosnjak, M. and T. Tuten. 2003. “Prepaid and Promised Incentives in Web Surveys: an Experiment.” Social Science Computer Review 21: 208-217. Doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0894439303021002006.10.1177/0894439303021002006]Search in Google Scholar
[Brandtzæg, P., J. Heim, and A. Karahasanovic. 2011. “Understanding the New Digital Divide - A Typology of Internet Users in Europe.” International Journal of Human- Computer Studies 69: 123-138. Doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhcs.2010.11.004.10.1016/j.ijhcs.2010.11.004]Search in Google Scholar
[Braunsberger, K., H. Wybenga, and R. Gates. 2007. “A Comparison of Reliability Between Telephone and Web-Based Surveys.” Journal of Business Research 60: 758-764. Doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2007.02.015.10.1016/j.jbusres.2007.02.015]Search in Google Scholar
[Burden, B.C. 2000. “Voter Turnout and the National Election Studies.” Political Analysis 8: 389-398.10.1093/oxfordjournals.pan.a029823]Search in Google Scholar
[Busse, B. and M. Fuchs. 2012. “The Components of Landline Telephone Survey Coverage Bias. The Relative Importance of No-Phone and Mobile-Only Populations.” Quality and Quantity 46: 1209-1225. Doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11135-011-9431-3.10.1007/s11135-011-9431-3]Search in Google Scholar
[Callegaro, M. and C. DiSogra. 2008. “Computing Response Metrics for Online Panels.” Public Opinion Quarterly 72: 1008-1032. Doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/poq/nfn065.10.1093/poq/nfn065]Search in Google Scholar
[Chang, L. and J. Krosnick. 2009. “National Surveys via RDD Telephone Interviewing Versus the Internet.” Public Opinion Quarterly 73: 641-678. Doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1086/346010.10.1086/346010]Search in Google Scholar
[Christian, L., D. Dillman, and J. Smith. 2008. “The Effects of Mode and Format on Answers to Scalar Questions in Telephone and Web Surveys.” In Advances in Telephone Surveys, edited by J.M. Lepkowski, 250-275. New York: Wiley & Sons.10.1002/9780470173404.ch12]Search in Google Scholar
[Cobben, F. and J. Bethlehem. 2005. “Adjusting Undercoverage and Nonresponse Bias in Telephone Surveys.” Discussion paper 05006. CBS, Statistics Netherlands, Voorburg/ Heerlen. Available at: http://www.cbs.nl/nr/rdonlyres/7fd00f42-15a3-4151-9daa-2d54-566cf59a/0/200506x10pub.pdf (accessed February, 2016).]Search in Google Scholar
[Curtin, R., E. Singer, and S. Presser. 2007. “Incentives in Random Digit Dial Telephone Surveys: a Replication and Extension.” Journal of Official Statistics 23: 91-105.]Search in Google Scholar
[De Leeuw, E. 2005. “To Mix or Not To Mix Data Collection Modes in Surveys.” Journal of Official Statistics 21: 233-255.]Search in Google Scholar
[Dillman, D. 2000. Mail and Telephone Surveys: The Tailored Design Method. New York: John Wiley & Sons.]Search in Google Scholar
[Dillman, D. 2011. Mail and Internet surveys: The Tailored Design Method - 2007 Update With New Internet, Visual, and Mixed-Mode Guide. New York: John Wiley & Sons.]Search in Google Scholar
[Dillman, D. and L. Christian. 2005. “Survey Mode as a Source of Instability in Responses Across Surveys.” Field Methods 17: 30-52. Doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1525822X04269550.10.1177/1525822X04269550]Search in Google Scholar
[Dillman, D., G. Phelps, R. Tortora, K. Swift, J. Kohrell, J. Berck, and B. Messer. 2009. “Response Rate and Measurement Differences in Mixed-Mode Surveys Using Mail, Telephone, Interactive Voice Response (IVR) and the Internet.” Social Science Research 28: 1-18. Doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ssresearch.2008.03.00.]Search in Google Scholar
[Ernst Stähli, M. 2012. “Telephone Surveys in Switzerland: Spotlight.” In Telephone Surveys in Europe: Research and Practice, edited by M. Häder, S. Häder and M. Kühne, 25-36. Berlin: Springer.10.1007/978-3-642-25411-6_3]Search in Google Scholar
[Fricker, S., M. Galesic, R. Tourangeau, and T. Yan. 2005. “An Experimental Comparison of Web and Telephone Surveys.” Public Opinion Quarterly 69: 370-392. Doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/poq/nfi027.10.1093/poq/nfi027]Search in Google Scholar
[Göritz, A. 2004. “The Impact of Material Incentives on Response Quantity, Response Quality, Sample Composition, Survey Outcome, and Cost in Online Access Panels.” International Journal of Market Research 46: 327-345. Gö ritz, A. 2006. “Incentives in Web Studies: Methodological Issues and a Review.” International Journal of Internet Science 1: 58-70.]Search in Google Scholar
[Groves, R., R. Cialdini, and M. Couper. 1992. “Understanding the Decision to Participate in a Survey.” Public Opinion Quarterly 56: 475-493. Doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1086/269338.10.1086/269338]Search in Google Scholar
[Groves, R., F. Fowler, M. Couper, J. Lepkowski, E. Singer, and R. Tourangeau. 2004a. Survey Methodology, Wiley Series in Survey Methodology. New York: Wiley.]Search in Google Scholar
[Groves, R., S. Presser, and S. Dipko. 2004b. “The Role of Topic Interest in Survey Participation Decisions.” Public Opinion Quarterly 68: 2-31. Doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/poq/nfh002.10.1093/poq/nfh002]Search in Google Scholar
[Holbrook, A.L. and J.A. Krosnick. 2010. “Social Desirability Bias in Voter Turnout Reports Tests Using the Item Count Technique.” Public Opinion Quarterly 74: 37-67. Doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/poq/nfp065.10.1093/poq/nfp065]Search in Google Scholar
[Joye, C. 2012. “Srph-Castem.” FORS - SFSO workshop, June 21. Neuchâtel.]Search in Google Scholar
[Joye, D., A. Pollien, M. Sapin, and M. Ernst Stähli. 2012. “Who Can Be Contacted by Phone? Lessons from Switzerland.” In Telephone Surveys in Europe: Research and Practice, edited by M. Häder, S. Häder and M. Kühne, 85-102. Berlin: Springer- Verlag.10.1007/978-3-642-25411-6_8]Search in Google Scholar
[Karp, J.A. and D. Brockington. 2005. “Social Desirability and Response Validity: A Comparative Analysis of Overreporting Voter Turnout in Five Countries.” The Journal of Politics 67: 825-840. Doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2508.2005.00341.x.10.1111/j.1468-2508.2005.00341.x]Search in Google Scholar
[Kreuter, F., S. Presser, and R. Tourangeau. 2008. “Social Desirability Bias in CATI, IVR, and Web Surveys.” Public Opinion Quarterly 72: 847-865. Doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/poq/nfn063.10.1093/poq/nfn063]Search in Google Scholar
[Krosnick, J. 1991. “Response Strategies for Coping With the Cognitive Demands of Attitude Measures in Surveys.” Applied Cognitive Psychology 5: 213-236. Doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/acp.2350050305.10.1002/acp.2350050305]Search in Google Scholar
[Link, M. and M. Fahimi. 2008. “Telephone Survey Sampling.” In Sampling of Populations: Methods and Applications, edited by P.S. Levy and S. Lemeshow, 455-487. New York: Wiley.]Search in Google Scholar
[Lipps, O. and K. Kissau. 2012. “Nonresponse in an Individual Register Sample Telephone Survey in Lucerne (Switzerland).” In Telephone Surveys in Europe: Research and Practice, edited by M. Häder, S. Häder and M. Kühne, 187-208. Berlin: Springer-Verlag.10.1007/978-3-642-25411-6_13]Search in Google Scholar
[Lipps, O. and N. Pekari. 2013. Mode and Incentive Effects in an Individual Register Frame Based Swiss Election Study. FORS Working Paper Series, paper 2013-3. Lausanne: FORS.]Search in Google Scholar
[Lipps, O., N. Pekari, and C. Roberts. 2015. “Coverage and Nonresponse Errors in an Individual Register Frame Based Swiss Telephone Election Study.” Survey Research Methods 9: 71-82.]Search in Google Scholar
[Little, R.J. and S. Vartivarian. 2003. “On Weighting the Rates in Non-Response Weights.” Statistics in Medicine 22: 1589-1599. Doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/sim.1513.10.1002/sim.151312704617]Search in Google Scholar
[Lozar Manfreda, K., M. Bosnjak, J. Berzelak, I. Haas, and V. Vehovar. 2008. “Web Surveys Versus Other Survey Modes: a Meta-Analysis Comparing Response Rates.” International Journal of Market Research 50: 79-104.10.1177/147078530805000107]Search in Google Scholar
[Malhotra, N. and J. Krosnick. 2007. “The Effect of Survey Mode and Sampling on Inferences About Political Attitudes and Behavior: Comparing the 2000 and 2004 ANES to Internet Surveys With Nonprobability Samples.” Political Analysis 15: 286-323. Doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/pan/mpm003.10.1093/pan/mpm003]Search in Google Scholar
[McDonald, M.P. 2003. “On the Overreport Bias of the National Election Study Turnout Rate.” Political Analysis 11: 180-186. Doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/pan/mpg006.10.1093/pan/mpg006]Search in Google Scholar
[Messer, B.L. and D.A. Dillman. 2011. “Surveying the General Public Over the Internet Using Address-Based Sampling and Mail Contact Procedures.” Public Opinion Quarterly 75: 429-457. Doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/poq/nfr021.10.1093/poq/nfr021]Search in Google Scholar
[Mohorko, A., E. de Leeuw, and J. Hox. 2013a. “Internet Coverage and Coverage Bias in Europe: Developments Across Countries and Over Time.” Journal of Official Statistics 29: 609-622. Doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.2478/jos-2013-0042.10.2478/jos-2013-0042]Search in Google Scholar
[Mohorko, A., E. de Leeuw, and J. Hox. 2013b. “Coverage Bias in European Telephone Surveys: Developments of Landline and Mobile Phone Coverage Across Countries and Over Time.” Survey Methods: Insights from the Field. Doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.13094/SMIF-2013-00002.]Search in Google Scholar
[Mood, C. 2010. “Logistic Regression: Why We Cannot Do What We Think We Can Do, and What We Can Do About It.” European Sociological Review 26: 67-82. Doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/esr/jcp006.10.1093/esr/jcp006]Search in Google Scholar
[Nagelhout, G., M. Willemsen, M. Thompson, G. Fong, B. van den Putte, and H. de Vries. 010. “Is Web Interviewing a Good Alternative to Telephone Interviewing? Findings from the International Tobacco Control (ITC) Netherlands Survey.” BMC Public Health 10: 351. Doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1471-2458-10-351.10.1186/1471-2458-10-351289779620565838]Search in Google Scholar
[Omnibus 2010. Survey on Information and Communication Technology, Swiss Federal Statistical Office 2010. Excel result sheets (in German; accessed October 21, 2013). Available at: http://www.bfs.admin.ch/bfs/portal/de/index/themen/16/04/data.html (accessed December 2014).]Search in Google Scholar
[Parsons, N. and M. Manierre. 2014. “Investigating the Relationship Among Prepaid Token Incentives, Response Rates, and Nonresponse Bias in a Web Survey.” Field Methods 26: 191-204. Doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1525822X13500120.10.1177/1525822X13500120]Search in Google Scholar
[Peytchev, A. 2009. “Survey Breakoff.” Public Opinion Quarterly 73: 74-97. Doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/poq/nfp014.10.1093/poq/nfp014]Search in Google Scholar
[Revilla, M.A. and W.E. Saris. 2013. “A Comparison of the Quality of Questions in a Face-to-Face and a Web Survey.” International Journal of Public Opinion Research 25: 242-253. Doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/ijpor/eds007.10.1093/ijpor/eds007]Search in Google Scholar
[Ryu, E., M. Couper, and R. Marans. 2006. “Survey Incentives: Cash vs. In-Kind, Face-to- Face vs. Mail, Response Rate vs. Nonresponse Error.” International Journal of Public Opinion Research 18: 89-106. Doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/ijpor/edh089.10.1093/ijpor/edh089]Search in Google Scholar
[Sánchez-Fernández, J., F. Muñoz-Leiva, F.J. Montoro-Ríos, and J. Ángel Ibáñez-Zapata. 2010. “An Analysis of the Effect of Pre-Incentives and Post-Incentives Based on Draws on Response to Web Surveys.” Quality and Quantity 44: 357-373. Doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11135-008-9197-4.10.1007/s11135-008-9197-4]Search in Google Scholar
[Schaurer, I., B. Struminskaya, L. Kaczmirek, and W. Bandilla. 2012. “The Price We Have to Pay: Incentive Experiments in the Recruitment Process for a Probability-Based Online Panel.” Presentation at the General Online Research Conference (GOR) March 5-7, 2012, Mannheim.]Search in Google Scholar
[Scherpenzeel, A. and V. Toepoel. 2012. “Recruiting a Probability Sample for an Online Panel. Effects of Contact Mode, Incentives, and Information.” Public Opinion Quarterly 76: 470-490. Doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/poq/nfs037.10.1093/poq/nfs037]Search in Google Scholar
[Schonlau, M., A. van Soest, A. Kapteyn, and M. Couper. 2009. “Selection Bias in Web Surveys and the Use of Propensity Scores.” Sociological Methods and Research 37: 291-318. Doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0049124108327128.10.1177/0049124108327128]Search in Google Scholar
[Selb, P. and S. Munzert. 2013. “Voter Overrepresentation, Vote Misreporting, and Turnout Bias in Postelection Surveys.” Electoral Studies 32: 186-196. Doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.electstud.2012.11.004.10.1016/j.electstud.2012.11.004]Search in Google Scholar
[Sinclair, M., J. O’Toole, M. Malawaraarachchi, and K. Leder. 2012. “Comparison of Response Rates and Cost-Effectiveness for a Community-Based Survey: Postal, Internet and Telephone Modes with Generic or Personalised Recruitment Approaches.” BMC Medical Research Methodology 12: 132. Doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1471-2288-12-132.10.1186/1471-2288-12-132]Search in Google Scholar
[Singer, E. and R. Bossarte. 2006. “Incentives for Survey Participation. When are they ‘Coercive’?” American Journal of Preventive Medicine 31: 411-418. Doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.amepre.2006.07.013.10.1016/j.amepre.2006.07.013]Search in Google Scholar
[Singer, E. J. van Hoewyk, and M. Maher. 2000. “Experiments with Incentives in Telephone Surveys.” Public Opinion Quarterly 64: 171-188. Doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1086/317761.10.1086/317761]Search in Google Scholar
[Singer, E. and C. Ye. 2013. “The Use and Effects of Incentives in Surveys.” The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science 645: 112-141. Doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0002716212458082.10.1177/0002716212458082]Search in Google Scholar
[Stephenson, L. and J. Creˆte. 2011. “Studying Political Behavior: A Comparison of Internet and Telephone Surveys.” International Journal of Public Opinion Research 23: 24-55. Doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/ijpor/edq025.10.1093/ijpor/edq025]Search in Google Scholar
[Struminskaya, B., L. Kaczmirek, I. Schaurer, and W. Bandilla. 2014. “Assessing Representativeness of a German Probability-Based Panel.” In Online Panel Research: A Data Quality Perspective, edited by M. Callegaro, R. Baker, J. Bethlehem, A. Gö ritz, J. Krosnick, and P. Lavrakas, 61-85. New York: John Wiley & Sons.10.1002/9781118763520.ch3]Search in Google Scholar
[Su, J., P. Shao, and J. Fang. 2008. “Effect of Incentives on Web-Based Surveys.” Tsinghua Science and Technology 13: 344-347. Doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S1007-0214(08)70055-5.10.1016/S1007-0214(08)70055-5]Search in Google Scholar
[Teisl, M., B. Roe, and M. Vayda. 2006. “Incentive Effects on Response Rates, Data Quality, and Survey Administration Costs.” International Journal of Public Opinion Research 18: 364-373. Doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/ijpor/edh106.10.1093/ijpor/edh106]Search in Google Scholar
[Vannieuwenhuyze, J. and G. Loosveldt. 2013. “Evaluating Relative Mode Effects in Mixed-Mode Surveys: Three Methods to Disentangle Selection and Measurement Effects.” Sociological Methods & Research 42: 82-104. Doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0049124112464868.10.1177/0049124112464868]Search in Google Scholar
[Van Veen, F., A. Göritz, and S. Sattler. 2011. “The Impact of Monetary Incentives on Completion and Data Quality in Online Surveys.” Presentation at the European Survey Research Association (ESRA) Conference, Lausanne, July 18-22 and General Online Research (GOR) Conference, Düsseldorf, March 14-16.]Search in Google Scholar
[Von der Lippe, E., P. Schmich, and C. Lange. 2011. “Advance Letters as a Way of Reducing Non-Response in a National Health Telephone Survey: Differences Between Listed and Unlisted Numbers.” Survey Research Methods 5: 103-116. Doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.18148/srm/2011.v5i3.4657#sthash.qLueRYqS.dpuf.]Search in Google Scholar
[Warren, J. and A. Halpern-Manners. 2012. “Panel Conditioning in Longitudinal Social Science Surveys.” Sociological Methods and Research 41: 491-534. Doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0049124112460374.10.1177/0049124112460374]Search in Google Scholar
[Yeager, D., J. Krosnick, L. Chang, H. Javitz, M. Levendusky, A. Simpser, and R. Wang. 2011. “Comparing the Accuracy of RDD Telephone Surveys and Internet Surveys Conducted with Probability and Non-Probability Samples.” Public Opinion Quarterly 75: 709-747. Doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/poq/nfr020.10.1093/poq/nfr020]Search in Google Scholar
[Zickhur, K. and A. Smith. 2012. Digital Differences. Pew Internet & American Life Project 13. Available at: http://www.pewinternet.org/2012/04/13/digital-differences/ (accessed August 2014). ]Search in Google Scholar