Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Survey Research in HCI

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Book cover Ways of Knowing in HCI

Abstract

Surveys, now commonplace on the Internet, allow researchers to make inferences about an entire population by gathering information from a small subset of the larger group. Surveys can gather insights about people’s attitudes, perceptions, intents, habits, awarenesses, experiences, and characteristics, at significant moments both in time and over time. Even though they are easy to administer, there is a wide gap between quick-and-dirty surveys and surveys that are properly planned, constructed, and analyzed.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 79.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 99.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 99.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

Overview Books

  • Couper, M. (2008). Designing effective Web surveys. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fowler, F. J., Jr. (1995). Improving survey questions: Design and evaluation (Vol. 38). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Incorporated.

    Google Scholar 

  • Groves, R. M. (1989). Survey errors and survey costs. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Groves, R. M. (2004). Survey errors and survey costs (Vol. 536). Hoboken, NJ: Wiley-Interscience.

    Google Scholar 

  • Groves, R. M., Fowler, F. J., Couper, M. P., Lepkowski, J. M., Singer, E., & Tourangeau, R. (2004). Survey methodology. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Marsden, P. V., & Wright, J. (Eds.). (2010). Handbook of survey research (2nd ed.). Bingley, UK: Emerald Publishing Group Limited.

    Google Scholar 

Sampling Methods

  • Aquilino, W. S. (1994). Interview mode effects in surveys of drug and alcohol use: A field experiment. Public Opinion Quarterly., 58(2), 210–240.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cochran, W. G. (1977). Sampling techniques (3rd ed.). New York, NY: Wiley.

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Couper, M. P. (2000). Web surveys: A review of issues and approaches. Public Opinion Quarterly, 64, 464–494.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kish, L. (1965). Survey sampling. New York, NY: Wiley.

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Krejcie, R. V., & Morgan, D. W. (1970). Determining sample size for research activities. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 30, 607–610.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lohr, S. L. (1999). Sampling: Design and analysis. Pacific Grove, CA: Duxbury Press.

    MATH  Google Scholar 

Questionnaire Design

  • Bradburn, N. M., Sudman, S., & Wansink, B. (2004). Asking questions: The definitive guide to questionnaire design – for market research, political polls, and social and health questionnaires. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass. Revised.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cannell, C. F., & Kahn, R. L. (1968). Interviewing. The Handbook of Social Psychology, 2, 526–595.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chan, J. C. (1991). Response-order effects in Likert-type scales. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 51(3), 531–540.

    Google Scholar 

  • Costa, P. T., & McCrae, R. R. (1988). From catalog to classification: Murray’s needs and the five-factor model. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 55(2), 258.

    Google Scholar 

  • Couper, M. P., Tourangeau, R., Conrad, F. G., & Crawford, S. D. (2004). What they see is what we get response options for web surveys. Social Science Computer Review, 22(1), 111–127.

    Google Scholar 

  • Edwards, A. L., & Kenney, K. C. (1946). A comparison of the Thurstone and Likert techniques of attitudes scale construction. Journal of Applied Psychology, 30, 72–83.

    Google Scholar 

  • Goffman, E. (1959). The presentation of self in everyday life, 1–17. Garden City, NY

    Google Scholar 

  • Goldberg, L. R. (1990). An alternative description of personality: The big-five factor structure. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 59(6), 1216.

    Google Scholar 

  • Herzog, A. R., & Bachman, J. G. (1981). Effects of questionnaire length on response quality. Public Opinion Quarterly, 45(4), 549–559.

    Google Scholar 

  • Holbrook, A. L., & Krosnick, J. A. (2010). Social desirability bias in voter turnout reports tests using the item count technique. Public Opinion Quarterly, 74(1), 37–67.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kinder, D. R., & Iyengar, S. (1987). News That Matters: Television and American Opinion. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Krosnick, J. A. (1991). Response strategies for coping with the cognitive demands of attitude measures in surveys. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 5, 213–236.

    Google Scholar 

  • Krosnick, J. A. (1999). Survey research. Annual review of psychology, 50(1), 537–567.

    Google Scholar 

  • Krosnick, J. A. (2002). The causes of no-opinion responses to attitude measures in surveys: They are rarely what they appear to be. In R. Groves, D. Dillman, J. Eltinge, & R. Little (Eds.), Survey non-response (pp. 87–100). New York: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Krosnick, J. A., & Alwin, D. F. (1987). Satisficing: A strategy for dealing with the demands of survey questions. Columbus, OH: Ohio State University.

    Google Scholar 

  • Krosnick, J. A., & Alwin, D. F. (1988). A test of the form-resistant correlation hypothesis ratings, rankings, and the measurement of values. Public Opinion Quarterly, 52(4), 526–538.

    Google Scholar 

  • Krosnick, J. A., & Fabrigar, L. A. (1997). Designing rating scales for effective measurement in surveys. In L. Lyberg et al. (Eds.), Survey measurement and process quality (pp. 141–164). New York: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Krosnick, J. A., Narayan, S., & Smith, W. R. (1996). Satisficing in surveys: Initial evidence. New Directions for Evaluation, 1996(70), 29–44.

    Google Scholar 

  • Krosnick, J. A., & Presser, S. (2010). Question and questionnaire design. In P. V. Marsden & J. D. Wright (Eds.), Handbook of survey research (pp. 263–314). Bingley, UK: Emerald Group Publishing Limited.

    Google Scholar 

  • Landon, E. L. (1971). Order bias, the ideal rating, and the semantic differential. Journal of Marketing Research, 8(3), 375–378.

    Google Scholar 

  • O’Muircheartaigh, C. A., Krosnick, J. A., & Helic, A. (2001). Middle alternatives, acquiescence, and the quality of questionnaire data. In B. Irving (Ed.), Harris Graduate School of Public Policy Studies. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago.

    Google Scholar 

  • Paulhus, D. L. (1984). Two-component models of socially desirable responding. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 46(3), 598.

    Google Scholar 

  • Payne, S. L. (1951). The art of asking questions. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Payne, J. D. (1971). The effects of reversing the order of verbal rating scales in a postal survey. Journal of the Marketing Research Society, 14, 30–44.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rohrmann, B. (2003). Verbal qualifiers for rating scales: Sociolinguistic considerations and psychometric data. Project Report. Australia: University of Melbourne

    Google Scholar 

  • Saris, W. E., Revilla, M., Krosnick, J. A., & Shaeffer, E. M. (2010). Comparing questions with agree/disagree response options to questions with construct-specific response options. Survey Research Methods, 4(1), 61–79.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schaeffer, N. C., & Presser, S. (2003). The science of asking questions. Annual Review of Sociology, 29, 65–88.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schlenker, B. R., & Weigold, M. F. (1989). Goals and the self-identification process: Constructing desired identities. In L. Pervin (Ed.), Goal concepts in personality and social psychology (pp. 243–290). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schuman, H., & Presser, S. (1981). Questions and answers in attitude surveys. New York: Academic Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Simon, H. A. (1956). Rational choice and the structure of the environment. Psychological Review, 63(2), 129–138.

    Google Scholar 

  • Smith, D. H. (1967). Correcting for social desirability response sets in opinion-attitude survey research. Public Opinion Quarterly, 31, 87–94.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stone, G. C., Gage, N. L., & Leavitt, G. S. (1957). Two kinds of accuracy in predicting another’s responses. The Journal of Social Psychology, 45(2), 245–254.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tourangeau, R. (1984). Cognitive science and survey methods. Cognitive aspects of survey methodology: Building a bridge between disciplines (pp. 73–100). Washington, DC: National Academy Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tourangeau, R., Couper, M. P., & Conrad, F. (2004). Spacing, position, and order: Interpretive heuristics for visual features of survey questions. Public Opinion Quarterly, 68(3), 368–393.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tourangeau, R., Rips, L. J., & Rasinski, K. (2000). The psychology of survey response. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tourangeau, R., & Smith, T. W. (1996). Asking sensitive questions the impact of data collection mode, question format, and question context. Public Opinion Quarterly, 60(2), 275–304.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tourangeau, R., & Yan, T. (2007). Sensitive questions in surveys. Psychological Bulletin, 133(5), 859.

    Google Scholar 

  • Villar, A., & Krosnick, J. A. (2011). Global warming vs. climate change, taxes vs. prices: Does word choice matter? Climatic change, 105(1), 1–12.

    Google Scholar 

Visual Survey Design

  • Callegaro, M., Villar, A., & Yang, Y. (2011). A meta-analysis of experiments manipulating progress indicators in Web surveys. Annual Meeting of the American Association for Public Opinion Research, Phoenix

    Google Scholar 

  • Couper, M. (2011). Web survey methodology: Interface design, sampling and statistical inference. Presentation at EUSTAT-The Basque Statistics Institute, Vitoria-Gasteiz

    Google Scholar 

  • Couper, M. P., Conrad, F. G., & Tourangeau, R. (2007). Visual context effects in Web surveys. Public Opinion Quarterly, 71(4), 623–634.

    Google Scholar 

  • Peytchev, A., Couper, M. P., McCabe, S. E., & Crawford, S. D. (2006). Web survey design paging versus scrolling. Public Opinion Quarterly, 70(4), 596–607.

    Google Scholar 

  • Yan, T., Conrad, F. G., Tourangeau, R., & Couper, M. P. (2011). Should I stay or should I go: The effects of progress feedback, promised task duration, and length of questionnaire on completing Web surveys. International Journal of Public Opinion Research, 23(2), 131–147.

    Google Scholar 

Established Questionnaire Instruments

  • Brooke, J. (1996). SUS-A quick and dirty usability scale. Usability Evaluation in Industry, 189, 194.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chin, J. P., Diehl, V. A., & Norman, K. L. (1988, May). Development of an instrument measuring user satisfaction of the human-computer interface. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human factors in computing systems (pp. 213–218). New York, NY: ACM

    Google Scholar 

  • Hart, S. G., & Staveland, L. E. (1988). Development of NASA-TLX (Task Load Index): Results of empirical and theoretical research. Human Mental Workload, 1, 139–183.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kirakowski, J., & Corbett, M. (1993). SUMI: The software usability measurement inventory. British Journal of Educational Technology, 24(3), 210–212.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lewis, J. R. (1995). IBM computer usability satisfaction questionnaires: Psychometric evaluation and instructions for use. International Journal of Human‐Computer Interaction, 7(1), 57–78.

    Google Scholar 

  • Moshagen, M., & Thielsch, M. T. (2010). Facets of visual aesthetics. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 68(10), 689–709.

    Google Scholar 

Questionnaire Evaluation

  • Bolton, R. N., & Bronkhorst, T. M. (1995). Questionnaire pretesting: Computer assisted coding of concurrent protocols. In N. Schwarz & S. Sudman (Eds.), Answering questions (pp. 37–64). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

    Google Scholar 

  • Collins, D. (2003). Pretesting survey instruments: An overview of cognitive methods. Quality of Life Research an International Journal of Quality of Life Aspects of Treatment Care and Rehabilitation, 12(3), 229–238.

    Google Scholar 

  • Drennan, J. (2003). Cognitive interviewing: Verbal data in the design and pretesting of questionnaires. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 42(1), 57–63.

    Google Scholar 

  • Presser, S., Couper, M. P., Lessler, J. T., Martin, E., Martin, J., Rothgeb, J. M., et al. (2004). Methods for testing and evaluating survey questions. Public Opinion Quarterly, 68(1), 109–130.

    Google Scholar 

Survey Response Rates and Non-response

  • American Association for Public Opinion Research, AAPOR. (2011). Standard definitions: Final dispositions of case codes and outcome rates for surveys. (7th ed). http://aapor.org/Content/NavigationMenu/AboutAAPOR/StandardsampEthics/StandardDefinitions/StandardDefinitions2011.pdf

    Google Scholar 

  • Baruch, Y. (1999). Response rates in academic studies: A comparative analysis. Human Relations, 52, 421–434.

    Google Scholar 

  • Baruch, Y., & Holtom, B. C. (2008). Survey response rate levels and trends in organizational research. Human Relations, 61(8), 1139–1160.

    Google Scholar 

  • Church, A. H. (1993). Estimating the effect of incentives on mail survey response rates: A meta-analysis. Public Opinion Quarterly, 57, 62–79.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cook, C., Heath, F., & Thompson, R. L. (2000). A meta-analysis of response rates in Web- or Internet-based surveys. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 60(6), 821–836.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dillman, D. A. (1978). Mail and telephone surveys: The total design method. New York: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dillman, D. A. (1991). The design and administration of mail surveys. Annual Review of Sociology, 17, 225–249.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dillman, D. A. (2007). Mail and Internet surveys: The tailored design method (2nd ed.). Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fan, W., & Yan, Z. (2010). Factors affecting response rates of the web survey: A systematic review. Computers in Human Behavior, 26(2), 132–139.

    Google Scholar 

  • Groves, R. M. (2006). Non-response rates and non-response bias in household surveys. Public Opinion Quarterly, 70, 646–75.

    Google Scholar 

  • Groves, R. M., Presser, S., & Dipko, S. (2004). The role of topic interest in survey participation decisions. Public Opinion Quarterly, 68(1), 2–31.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kaplowitz, M. D., Hadlock, T. D., & Levine, R. (2004). A comparison of web and mail survey response rates. Public Opinion Quarterly, 68(1), 94–101.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kerlinger, F. N. (1986). Foundations of behavioral research (3rd ed.). New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kiesler, S., & Sproull, L. S. (1986). Response effects in the electronic survey. Public Opinion Quarterly, 50, 402–413.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lavrakas, P. J. (2011). The use of incentives in survey research. 66th Annual Conference of the American Association for Public Opinion Research

    Google Scholar 

  • Lin, I., & Schaeffer, N. C. (1995). Using survey participants to estimate the impact of nonparticipation. Public Opinion Quarterly, 59(2), 236–258.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lu, H., & Gelman, A. (2003). A method for estimating design-based sampling variances for surveys with weighting, poststratification, and raking. Journal of Official Statistics, 19(2), 133–152.

    Google Scholar 

  • Manfreda, K. L., Bosnjak, M., Berzelak, J., Haas, I., Vehovar, V., & Berzelak, N. (2008). Web surveys versus other survey modes: A meta-analysis comparing response rates. Journal of the Market Research Society, 50(1), 79.

    Google Scholar 

  • Olson, K. (2006). Survey participation, non-response bias, measurement error bias, and total bias. Public Opinion Quarterly, 70(5), 737–758.

    Google Scholar 

  • Peytchev, A. (2009). Survey breakoff. Public Opinion Quarterly, 73(1), 74–97.

    MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Schonlau, M., Van Soest, A., Kapteyn, A., & Couper, M. (2009). Selection bias in web surveys and the use of propensity scores. Sociological Methods & Research, 37(3), 291–318.

    MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Sheehan, K. B. (2001). E-mail survey response rates: A review. Journal of Computer Mediated Communication, 6(2), 1–16.

    MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Singer, E. (2002). The use of incentives to reduce non-response in household surveys. In R. Groves, D. Dillman, J. Eltinge, & R. Little (Eds.), Survey non-response (pp. 87–100). New York: Wiley. 163–177.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stevenson, J., Dykema, J., Cyffka, C., Klein, L., & Goldrick-Rab, S. (2012). What are the odds? Lotteries versus cash incentives. Response rates, cost and data quality for a Web survey of low-income former and current college students. 67th Annual Conference of the American Association for Public Opinion Research

    Google Scholar 

Survey Analysis

  • Armstrong, D., Gosling, A., Weinman, J., & Marteau, T. (1997). The place of inter-rater reliability in qualitative research: An empirical study. Sociology, 31(3), 597–606.

    Google Scholar 

  • Böhm, A. (2004). Theoretical coding: Text analysis in grounded theory. In A companion to qualitative research, London: SAGE. pp. 270–275.

    Google Scholar 

  • De Leeuw, E. D., Hox, J. J., & Huisman, M. (2003). Prevention and treatment of item nonresponse. Journal of Official Statistics, 19(2), 153–176.

    Google Scholar 

  • Glaser, B. G., & Strauss, A. L. (1967). The discovery of grounded theory: Strategies for qualitative research. Hawthorne, NY: Aldine de Gruyter.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gwet, K. L. (2001). Handbook of inter-rater reliability. Gaithersburg, MD: Advanced Analytics, LLC.

    Google Scholar 

  • Heeringa, S. G., West, B. T., & Berglund, P. A. (2010). Applied survey data analysis. Boca Raton, FL: Chapman & Hall/CRC.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lee, E. S., Forthofer, R. N., & Lorimor, R. J. (1989). Analyzing complex survey data. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Saldaña, J. (2009). The coding manual for qualitative researchers. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications Limited.

    Google Scholar 

Other References

  • Abran, A., Khelifi, A., Suryn, W., & Seffah, A. (2003). Usability meanings and interpretations in ISO standards. Software Quality Journal, 11(4), 325–338.

    Google Scholar 

  • Anandarajan, M., Zaman, M., Dai, Q., & Arinze, B. (2010). Generation Y adoption of instant messaging: An examination of the impact of social usefulness and media richness on use richness. IEEE Transactions on Professional Communication, 53(2), 132–143.

    Google Scholar 

  • Archambault, A., & Grudin, J. (2012). A longitudinal study of facebook, linkedin, & twitter use. In Proceedings of the 2012 ACM Annual Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI '12) (pp. 2741–2750). New York: ACM

    Google Scholar 

  • Auter, P. J. (2007). Portable social groups: Willingness to communicate, interpersonal communication gratifications, and cell phone use among young adults. International Journal of Mobile Communications, 5(2), 139–156.

    Google Scholar 

  • Calfee, J. E., & Ringold, D. J. (1994). The 70 % majority: Enduring consumer beliefs about advertising. Journal of Public Policy & Marketing, 13(2).

    Google Scholar 

  • Chen, J., Geyer, W., Dugan, C., Muller, M., & Guy, I. (2009). Make new friends, but keep the old: Recommending people on social networking sites. In Proceedings of the 27th International Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI '09), (pp. 201–210). New York: ACM

    Google Scholar 

  • Clauser, B. E. (2007). The life and labors of Francis Galton: A review of four recent books about the father of behavioral statistics. Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics, 32(4), 440–444.

    Google Scholar 

  • Converse, J. (1987). Survey research in the United States: Roots and emergence 1890–1960. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Drouin, M., & Landgraff, C. (2012). Texting, sexting, and attachment in college students’ romantic relationships. Computers in Human Behavior, 28, 444–449.

    Google Scholar 

  • Feng, J., Lazar, J., Kumin, L., & Ozok, A. (2010). Computer usage by children with down syndrome: Challenges and future research. ACM Transactions on Accessible Computing, 2(3), 35–41.

    Google Scholar 

  • Froelich, J., Findlater, L., Ostergren, M., Ramanathan, S., Peterson, J., Wragg, I., et al. (2012). The design and evaluation of prototype eco-feedback displays for fixture-level water usage data. In Proceedings of the 2012 ACM Annual Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI '12) (pp. 2367–2376). New York: ACM

    Google Scholar 

  • Harrison, M. A. (2011). College students’ prevalence and perceptions of text messaging while driving. Accident Analysis and Prevention, 43, 1516–1520.

    Google Scholar 

  • Junco, R., & Cotten, S. R. (2011). Perceived academic effects of instant messaging use. Computers & Education, 56, 370–378.

    Google Scholar 

  • Katosh, J. P., & Traugott, M. W. (1981). The consequences of validated and self-reported voting measures. Public Opinion Quarterly, 45(4), 519–535.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nacke, L. E., Grimshaw, M. N., & Lindley, C. A. (2010). More than a feeling: Measurement of sonic user experience and psychophysiology in a first-person shooter game. Interacting with Computers, 22(5), 336–343.

    Google Scholar 

  • Obermiller, C., & Spangenberg, E. R. (1998). Development of a scale to measure consumer skepticism toward advertising. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 7(2), 159–186.

    Google Scholar 

  • Obermiller, C., & Spangenberg, E. R. (2000). On the origin and distinctiveness of skepticism toward advertising. Marketing Letters, 11, 311–322.

    Google Scholar 

  • Person, A. K., Blain, M. L. M., Jiang, H., Rasmussen, P. W., & Stout, J. E. (2011). Text messaging for enhancement of testing and treatment for tuberculosis, human immunodeficiency virus, and syphilis: A survey of attitudes toward cellular phones and healthcare. Telemedicine Journal and e-Health, 17(3), 189–195.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pitkow, J. E., & Recker, M. (1994). Results from the first World-Wide web user survey. Computer Networks and ISDN Systems, 27(2), 243–254.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rodden, R., Hutchinson, H., & Fu, X. (2010). Measuring the user experience on a large scale: User-centered metrics for web applications. In Proceedings of the 28th International Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI '10) (pp. 2395–2398) ACM, New York, NY, USA

    Google Scholar 

  • Schild, J., LaViola, J., & Masuch, M. (2012). Understanding user experience in stereoscopic 3D games. In Proceedings of the 2012 ACM Annual Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI '12) (pp. 89–98). New York: ACM

    Google Scholar 

  • Shklovski, I., Kraut, R., & Cummings, J. (2008). Keeping in touch by technology: Maintaining friendships after a residential move. In Proceedings of the 26th Annual SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI '08) (pp. 807–816). New York: ACM

    Google Scholar 

  • Turner, M., Love, S., & Howell, M. (2008). Understanding emotions experienced when using a mobile phone in public: The social usability of mobile (cellular) telephones. Telematics and Informatics, 25, 201–215.

    Google Scholar 

  • Weisskirch, R. S., & Delevi, R. (2011). “Sexting” and adult romantic attachment. Computers in Human Behavior, 27, 1697–1701.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wright, P. J., & Randall, A. K. (2012). Internet pornography exposure and risky sexual behavior among adult males in the United States. Computers in Human Behavior, 28, 1410–1416.

    Google Scholar 

  • Yew, J., Shamma, D. A., & Churchill, E. F. (2011). Knowing funny: Genre perception and categorization in social video sharing. In Proceedings of the 2011 Annual Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI '11) (pp. 297–306). New York: ACM

    Google Scholar 

  • Zaman, M., Rajan, M. A., & Dai, Q. (2010). Experiencing flow with instant messaging and its facilitating role on creative behaviors. Computers in Human Behavior, 26, 1009–1018.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

 We would like to thank our employers Google, Inc. and Twitter, Inc. for making it possible for us to work on this chapter. There are many that contributed to this effort, and we would like to call out the most significant ones: Carolyn Wei for identifying published papers that used survey methodology for their work, Sandra Lozano for her insights on analysis, Mario Callegaro for inspiration, Ed Chi and Robin Jeffries for reviewing several drafts of this document, and Professors Jon Krosnick from Stanford University and Mick Couper from the University of Michigan for laying the foundation of our survey knowledge and connecting us to the broader survey research community.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Google Australia Pty Ltd., Level 5, 48 Pirrama Road, Pyrmont, NSW, 2009, Australia

    Hendrik Müller

  2. Google, Inc., 1600 Amphitheatre Parkway, Mountain View, CA, 94043, USA

    Aaron Sedley

  3. Twitter, Inc., 1355 Market Street, Suite 900, San Francisco, CA, 94103, USA

    Elizabeth Ferrall-Nunge

Authors
  1. Hendrik Müller
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Aaron Sedley
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Elizabeth Ferrall-Nunge
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Hendrik Müller .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. University of California, Irvine, Irvine, California, USA

    Judith S. Olson

  2. Group Social Computing, IBM T.J. Watson Research Center, Yorktown Heights, New York, USA

    Wendy A. Kellogg

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2014 Springer Science+Business Media New York

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Müller, H., Sedley, A., Ferrall-Nunge, E. (2014). Survey Research in HCI. In: Olson, J., Kellogg, W. (eds) Ways of Knowing in HCI. Springer, New York, NY. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4939-0378-8_10

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4939-0378-8_10

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, New York, NY

  • Print ISBN: 978-1-4939-0377-1

  • Online ISBN: 978-1-4939-0378-8

  • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation