20 research outputs found

    A Comparison of Four Probability-Based Online and Mixed-Mode Panels in Europe

    Get PDF
    Inferential statistics teach us that we need a random probability sample to infer from a sample to the general population. In online survey research, however, volunteer access panels, in which respondents self-select themselves into the sample, dominate the landscape. Such panels are attractive due to their low costs. Nevertheless, recent years have seen increasing numbers of debates about the quality, in particular about errors in the representativeness and measurement, of such panels. In this article, we describe four probability-based online and mixed-mode panels for the general population, namely, the Longitudinal Internet Studies for the Social Sciences (LISS) Panel in the Netherlands, the German Internet Panel (GIP) and the GESIS Panel in Germany, and the Longitudinal Study by Internet for the Social Sciences (ELIPSS) Panel in France. We compare them in terms of sampling strategies, offline recruitment procedures, and panel characteristics. Our aim is to provide an overview to the scientific community of the availability of such data sources to demonstrate the potential strategies for recruiting and maintaining probability-based online panels to practitioners and to direct analysts of the comparative data collected across these panels to methodological differences that may affect comparative estimates

    The Perception of Small Crime

    No full text
    Violations of social norms can be costly to society and they are, in the case of large crimes, followed by prosecution. Minor misbehaviors — small crimes — do not usually result in legal proceedings. Although the economic consequences of a single small crime can be low, such crimes generate substantial losses in the aggregate. In this paper we measure perceptions of incorrect behavior or ‘small crime’, based on a questionnaire administered to a large representative sample from the Dutch population. In the questionnaire we ask the respondents to rate the severity and justifiability of a number of small crimes. We present short questions that only state the nature of the small crime, as well as vignette questions, describing in detail the fictitious person committing the small crime and other factors related to the circumstances in which the small crime is committed. We find that the perceived severity of small crimes varies systematically with characteristics of the respondent as well as of the person committing the crime. Small crimes are considered less serious if committed by someone with lower income. Also, the association between respondent characteristics and perceived seriousness changes if the respondents are given more information about the offender and the circumstances of the offense
    corecore