Better to get 5 questions from a respondent when they are in the supermarket than 20 a week later

The most common surveys are probably better in terms of data quality than one long survey . It raises expenses and the time needed to complete the survey , but respondent fatigue is reduced and with that the quality of the data should rise .

How can merging gaming concepts to survey research become a ‘ game problems of traditional surveys . It is also true that not all surveys can be rendered into a game , which is something that will be discovered by trial and error .

What quality measures needs to be practiced to ensure optimum results for survey research ?

Andrew Jeavons : With web and

them up ?

Andrew Jeavons : Making surveys clearer and shorter is the best alternative . The problem with changing surveys in terms of their content is the potential for introducing biases . For instance more images may make the survey more interesting because of the content of the images , but images can introduce cognitive biases that may not be obvious .

Question texts should be made as short as possible , choice options as short as possible . Having 32 possible response choices , for instance , is too many . As few response options as possible is far better . I ’ m really not convinced that surveys can be made less boring while they remain in the traditional question and answer format , but they can be made simpler . Lowering the cognitive load of a survey is probably a more realistic goal than making it more interesting . There is also the basic truth that some survey topics are just not very interesting , no matter how many images you embellish the survey with . Making this type of survey easy to complete is the best hope . Breaking up the subject matter of a survey into several surveys helps too . Two short strongly that the gamification approach as championed by Betty Adamou at Research Through Gaming is the right approach for the future ( disclosure : I am a technical advisor to Research Through Gaming ). True gamification allows the respondent to provide data without the rigors of an “ ask and answer ” survey format . It also allows for paradata ( data about how data is collected ) such as response time to be measured which can provide extra insights . For instance the speed of response to a certain image may be an indicator of a non verbalized prejudice or affinity . Ultimately the game construct is held to be more engaging , they are games after all . Computer gaming has become a well established part of life for almost all age ranges , so it has a high level of familiarity . Early theories of child psychology were based on the idea that play in young children is a form of constructive cognition , albeit physical . Using games we may engage the respondent in a different sort of cognitive processing and hopefully overcome the issues of boredom . Gamification has some plausible psychological theory behind it which indicates it could solve many of the is a list of the data points that I feel are important for effective quality assurance .

( 1 ) Speed to complete survey . This is pretty well established now ; it can weed out people taking surveys as fast as possible with no regard to their answers .

( 2 ) Answer completeness – this is a count of how many codes respondents use of multiple choice questions , the length of open ends and so on . It could be viewed as a loose measurement of respondent attention .

( 3 ) Question retry count . I am not sure if many survey systems provide this measurement . This is a measure of how many questions are submitted that are not completed correctly . An example would be where mandatory items on a grid are not all completed and the grid is submitted anyway causing the survey system to force a respondent retry of the grid . Obviously it is a measure of the cognitive load of a survey , if questions are hard to complete correctly they must be placing a high load on the respondent . Paying attention to this measure in a soft survey launch is a chance to catch significant