Computer-administered versus paper-and-pencil surveys and the effect of sample selection

Airport patrons answered a self-administered questionnaire regarding their satisfaction with various airport facilities and operations. The questionnaire was administered either by a computer touch-sensitive screen or by a contextually identical paper-and-pencil version. For the latter method, respondents were selected randomly, and for the former, they were either randomly selected or self-selected. The effect of the method of questionnaire administration on the rating scales was very small when the samples were selected at random. However, there were substantial differences in ratings between self-selected and randomly selected respondents: The former gave consistently more negative ratings. These differences are probably due to psychological factors such as motivation to participate. Also, it was found that self-selected persons using the computer were more likely to make comments. The findings of this study are discussed with emphasis on their implications for computer interactive surveys.

[1]  Gary J. Lautenschlager,et al.  Computer administration of questions: More desirable or more social desirability? , 1990 .

[2]  Michael J. Burke,et al.  Computerized Psychological Testing: Overview and Critique , 1987 .

[3]  Robert M. Groves.  Implications of CATI , 1983 .

[4]  Nicolaos E. Synodinos,et al.  Computer interactive interviewing in survey research , 1988 .

[5]  J. Greist,et al.  Direct patient computer interviewing. , 1985, Journal of consulting and clinical psychology.

[6]  James C. Fink,et al.  CATI's First Decade , 1983 .

[7]  J. H. Frey,et al.  Survey research by telephone , 1983 .

[8]  Linda M. Doherty,et al.  Attitude assessment in organizations: Testing three microcomputer-based survey systems. , 1989 .

[9]  Willem E. Saris,et al.  Computer-Assisted Interviewing , 1991 .

[10]  Nicolaos E. Synodinos,et al.  Evaluating microcomputer interactive survey software , 1990 .

[11]  J. Merrill Shanks,et al.  The Current Status of Computer-Assisted Telephone Interviewing , 1983 .

[12]  Dave Bartram,et al.  Automated testing: Past, present and future , 1984 .

[13]  Christopher L. Martin,et al.  Some effects of computerized interviewing on job applicant responses , 1989 .

[14]  J. Liefeld,et al.  Response Effects in Computer-Administered Questioning , 1988 .

[15]  J. Greist,et al.  The reliability of a computer interview for drug use/abuse information , 1983 .

[16]  Paul Rosenfeld,et al.  Impression management, social desirability, and computer administration of attitude questionnaires: Does the computer make a difference? , 1992 .

[17]  H A Skinner,et al.  Does the computer make a difference? Computerized versus face-to-face versus self-report assessment of alcohol, drug, and tobacco use. , 1983, Journal of consulting and clinical psychology.

[18]  Alexander Basilevsky,et al.  Chapter 12 – Missing Data: A Review of the Literature , 1983 .

[19]  S. Kiesler,et al.  SELF-SELECTED AND RANDOMLY SELECTED RESPONDENTS IN A COMPUTER NETWORK SURVEY , 1992 .

[20]  Michael L. Vasu,et al.  Computer-Assisted Survey Research and Continuous Audience Response Technology for the Political and Social Sciences , 1990 .

[21]  S. Kiesler,et al.  Response Effects in the Electronic Survey , 1986 .