The Consequences of Personality Biases in Online Panels for Measuring Public Opinion

Author:

Valentino Nicholas A.1,Zhirkov Kirill2,Hillygus D. Sunshine3,Guay Brian4

Affiliation:

1. Professor in the Department of Political Science at the University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, USA

2. PhD candidate in the Department of Political Science at the University of Michigan , Ann Arbor, MI, USA

3. Professor in the Department of Political Science and the Sanford School of Public Policy  at Duke University, Durham, NC, USA

4. PhD candidate in the Department of Political Science at Duke University, Durham , NC, USA

Abstract

Abstract Online surveys, particularly those that draw samples from online panels of experienced respondents, now comprise a large segment of the academic and commercial opinion research markets due to their low cost and flexibility. A growing literature examines the implications of online surveys for data quality, most commonly by comparing demographic and political characteristics of different samples. In this paper, we explore the possibility that personality may differentially influence the likelihood of participation in online and face-to-face surveys. We argue that individuals high in extraversion and openness to experience may be underrepresented, and those low in these traits overrepresented, in professionalized online panels given the solitary nature of repeated survey-taking. Since openness to experience in particular is associated with liberal policy positions, differences in this trait may bias estimates of public opinion derived from professionalized online panels. Using data from the 2012 and 2016 dual-mode American National Election Studies, we compare political preferences and personality traits across parallel face-to-face and online samples. Respondents in the online samples were, on average, less open to experience and more politically conservative on a variety of issues compared to their face-to-face counterparts. This was true especially in 2012, when online respondents were drawn from a large panel of experienced respondents. We also find openness to be negatively related to the number of surveys completed by these respondents. These results suggest that reliance on professionalized survey respondents, who comprise the vast majority of online survey samples, can bias estimates of many quantities of interest.

Publisher

Oxford University Press (OUP)

Subject

History and Philosophy of Science,General Social Sciences,Sociology and Political Science,History,Communication

Reference50 articles.

1. “The Big Five Personality Traits and Partisanship in England;Aidt;Electoral Studies,2018

2. “User's Guide and Codebook for the ANES 2012 Time Series Study,2014

3. “Does Survey Mode Still Matter? Findings from a 2010 Multi-Mode Comparison;Ansolabehere;Political Analysis,2014

4. “Personality Facets and RIASEC Interests: An Integrated Model;Armstrong;Journal of Vocational Behavior,2009

5. “Nonresponse and Mode Effects in Self- and Interviewer-Administered Surveys;Atkeson;Political Analysis,2014

Cited by 9 articles. 订阅此论文施引文献 订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3