When will Nonprobability Surveys Mirror Probability Surveys? Considering Types of Inference and Weighting Strategies as Criteria for Correspondence

Abstract

When will a nonprobability sample look like a probability sample? This key question in survey research has reemerged with the proliferation of new, nonprobability methods for collecting social science data (Baker et al., 2013). Among these, Internet surveys offer myriad advantages in data collection, including reduced costs, faster survey administration, and possibly more accurate self-reports (Chang & Krosnick, 2010; Fricker & Schonlau, 2002; Greenlaw & Brown-Welty, 2009; Wright, 2005) as compared with other survey methods. These surveys also open new research possibilities, allowing for the presentation of experimental stimuli to broad national samples (Couper, 2000; Iyengar, 2011; Skitka & Sargis, 2006). But many of these advantages can only be reaped if data collected from nonprobability samples can be transformed to reflect the public. Inasmuch as this is not the case, there is reason for concern. The majority of Internet surveys use opt-in, nonprobability samples, for which generalizability is not assured (Baker et al., 2010; Couper, 2000).

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 136 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.