Regarding online, I’m not sure that virgin means quality.

Keep in mind that virgins are alone before industry’s questionnaires, which are getting, day by day, more sophisticated: Ajax, Flash, etc.

New respondents (usually new “internautes”) have to learn some basic concepts, from “next button” to “drag and drop”, before they are prepared to participate on the research process and really enjoy… everybody knows that the “first time” is not best one…

Cheers,

I couldn’t agree more. We’ve all seen too many poorly designed surveys. It would be interesting if anyone has done any research on what respondents think contributes to a good survey. Is it length, content, layout, etc. This by it’s nature, it may be difficult to measure which leads me to my question.

If users were to ‘rate’ a survey, what kind of measure do we use? Is it a scale question, 4, 5, 7 or 9 point? Is the rating based on enjoyability or some other factor?
Unfortunately, I think many may fear adding a few questions on research would burden or deter respondents from continuing.

As you stated, the technology to make surveys better is already here. The internet has made it quicker to field and collect survey responses, but few are actually making surveys better. There are a few stars but these may be the exception.

Once criticism that I’ve always had is that surveys are still this linear series of questions. Mail, mall and internet surveys are not all that different. This notion needs to be challenged.

Cheers,

Paul

I like Pete’s ideas too and I also heard this presentation in Orlando. I found the Oil analogy quite interesting but actually I would make a different twist on that line of discourse.

We have been threatened with oil shortage for 40 years. In reality there is none. There never will be. For our social, cultural, economic and technical appraisals change over time - whether that be by war, by discovery, by new technology or even legislation.

Those who push the oil arguments on scarcity do so out of self interest.

Panels are the same. Those who push communities and such impending doom on panels do so for the same reason as oil. Don’t get me wrong I am not saying that communities (or oil alternatives) are not invaluable and great things, but what I am saying is that they come from a certain direction and are hyped by some more than others according to their background. (For the record, I am selling ‘communities’ as well, so certainly not biased!)

That is why I found his argument interesting in the main because it was a direct analogy. And both are packaged nicely.

Same for ‘overpopulation’.

See you soon I hope….

-Tim

www.reviewbasics.com