Survey research methods, 2nd ed.

By Fowler, J. Floyd. 2009

1,448 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Developmental and Educational Psychology, Management Science and Operations Research, Sociology and Political Science

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/9267cf699ae99e1b056c83143bcb9b674303cfd1

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Developmental and Educational Psychology

In Management Science and Operations Research

In Sociology and Political Science

Citations in the corpus

Network News and Racial Beliefs: Exploring the Connection Between National Television News Exposure and Stereotypical Perceptions of African Americans (2008, background): “However, it is important to note that a cross-sectional survey such as this one cannot determine causality with any sufficient amount of certainty (Babbie, 1990; Wimmer & Dominick, 2000).”
An exploration of social networking site use, multitasking, and academic performance among United States and European university students (2013, methodology): “…graduate students used the following guidelines to review the survey for speciﬁc validity criteria: (1) Clarity in wording, (2) Relevance of the items, (3) Use of Standard English, (4) Absence of biased words and phrases, (5) For-matting of items, and (6) Clarity of the instructions (Fowler, 2002).”
Organizational Cultural Intelligence: Dynamic Capability Perspective (2010, background): “A survey study using cross-sectional data may permit one to generalize from the sample to the population with the objective of inferring about characteristic, behavior, or attitude (Babbie, 1990).”
Facebook® and academic performance (2010, methodology): “Validity evidence for the instrument was provided by reviewing the questionnaire for the following: (1) Clarity in wording, (2) relevance of the items, (3) use of standard English, (4) absence of biased words and phrases, (5) formatting of items, and (6) clarity of the instructions (Fowler, 2002).”
Research engagement in English language teaching (2007, methodology): “The design of the questionnaire—question types, wording, layout, length—was informed by the relevant methodological literature (e.g. Aldridge & Levine, 2001; Dörnyei, 2002; Fowler, 2002; Oppenheim, 1992).”
Implementing patient-reported outcomes assessment in clinical practice: a review of the options and considerations (2012, background): “and scored, including self-, interviewer, and computer administration [37–39].”
What About Writing? A National Exploratory Study of Writing Instruction in Teacher Preparation Programs (2016, background): “While the response rate could be considered low (Mertens, 2010) with 63 teacher educators responding (48% return), Fowler (2002) and Jackson (2009) agree that this is a typical return rate for an online survey.”
Academic Administrator Leadership Styles and the Impact on Faculty Job Satisfaction. (2014, background): “This reliability measurement indicates the extent to which the individual scale items are consistently measuring the same concept (Fowler, 2008).”
Preparing Early Childhood Educators to Address Young Children's Social-Emotional Development and Challenging Behavior (2008, background): “Even though our response rate was 70% Hemmeter et al. / Preparing Early Childhood Educators 337 of the sampling frame, it did not reach the common convention of 80% return rate needed to attenuate response bias and generalizability issues (Fowler, 2002).”
The Livelihood Vulnerability Index: A pragmatic approach to assessing risks from climate variability and change—A case study in Mozambique (2009, neutral): “We chose 6 years as the recall window for the natural disaster indicator because we thought that respondents would not accurately report disasters earlier than that (Fowler, 2002).”