Skip to main content Accessibility help

Subject Acquisition for Web-Based Surveys

  • R. Michael Alvarez (a1), Robert P. Sherman (a2) and Carla VanBeselaere (a3)


This article provides a basic report about subject recruitment processes for Web-based surveys. Using data from our ongoing Internet Survey of American Opinion project, two different recruitment techniques (banner advertisement and subscription campaigns) are compared. This comparison, together with a typology of Web-based surveys, provides insight into the validity and generalizability of Internet survey data. The results from this analysis show that, although Internet survey respondents differ demographically from the American population, the relationships among variables are similar across recruitment methods and match those implied by substantive theory. Thus, our research documents the basic methodology of subject acquisition for Web-based surveys, which, as we argue in our conclusion, may soon become the survey interview mode of choice for social scientists.



Hide All
The American Association for Public Opinion Research. 2000. Standard Definitions: Final Dispositions of Case Codes and Outcome Rates for Surveys. Ann Arbor, MI: AAPOR. (Available from
Berrens, R. P., Bohara, A. K., Jenkins-Smith, H., Silva, C., and Weimer, D. L. 2003. “The Advent of Internet Surveys for Political Research: A Comparison of Telephone and Internet Samples.” Political Analysis 11:122.
Brehm, John. 1993. The Phantom Respondents: Opinion Surveys and Political Representation. Ann Arbor: The University of Michigan Press.
Couper, Mick P. 2000. “Web Surveys: A Review of Issues and Approaches.” Public Opinion Quarterly 64:464494.
Couper, Mick P., Traugott, Michael W., and Lamias, Mark J. 2001. “Web Survey Design and Administration.” Public Opinion Quarterly 65:230253.
Dillman, Don A. 2000. Mail and Internet Surveys: The Tailored Design Method. 2nd ed. New York: John Wiley and Sons.
Federal Communications Commission. 2000. “Trends in Telephone Service.” Industry Analysis Division, Common Carrier Bureau, Washington, DC.
Federal Communications Commission. 2002. “Trends in Telephone Service.” Industry Analysis Division, Common Carrier Bureau, Washington, DC.
Green, Melanie C., Holbrook, Allyson L., and Krosnick, Jon A. 2001. “The Survey Response Process in Telephone and Face-to-Face Surveys: Differences in Respondent Satisficing and Social Desirability Response Bias.” Manuscript, Ohio State University.
Groves, Robert M. 1989. Survey Errors and Survey Costs, New York: John Wiley and Sons.
Krosnick, Jon A., and Chait Chang, Lin. 2001. “A Comparison of the Random Digit Dialing Telephone Survey Methodology with Internet Survey Methodology as Implemented by Knowledge Networks and Harris Interactive.” Manuscript, Ohio State University.
U.S. Department of Commerce. 1995. “Falling Through the Net.” (Available from
U.S. Department of Commerce. 1998. “Falling Through the Net II: New Data on the Digital Divide.” (Available from
U.S. Department of Commerce. 2000. “Falling Through the Net: Towards Digital Inclusion.” (Available from
U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics. 2000. “Current Population Survey: Design and Methodology,” Technical Paper 63. (Available from
VanBeselaere, Carla. 2001. “Sample Selection Issues in the Internet Survey of American Opinion (ISAO).” Manuscript, California Institute of Technology.
MathJax is a JavaScript display engine for mathematics. For more information see
Type Description Title
Supplementary materials

Alvarez et al. supplementary material

 PDF (121 KB)
121 KB


Altmetric attention score

Full text views

Total number of HTML views: 0
Total number of PDF views: 0 *
Loading metrics...

Abstract views

Total abstract views: 0 *
Loading metrics...

* Views captured on Cambridge Core between <date>. This data will be updated every 24 hours.

Usage data cannot currently be displayed