Metadata uplift of survey data for research discovery and provenance

Jon Johnson¹, Paul Bradshaw², Suparna De³, Deirdre Lungley⁴

1: University College London; 2: Scotcen; 3: University of Surrey; 4: University of Essex

Beyond the Questionnaire: Linking Passively Metered Platform Data with Surveys for Audience Profiling

David Goldschmidt, Lukas Stein

Datapods GmbH, Germany

Visualizing the Answering Process: Exploring Mode Differences with Respondent-Level Paradata from the IAB Establishment Panel

Corinna König¹, Marieke Volkert¹, Joseph Sakshaug^1,2

1: Institute for Employment Research, Germany; 2: LMU Munich

A picture is worth a thousand words: Factors influencing the quality of photos received through an online survey

Patricia Iglesias¹, Jessica Daikeler², Fiona Draxler³

1: Centre d'Estudis Demogràfics, Spain; 2: GESIS - Leibniz Institute for the Social Sciences; 3: University of Mannheim

Enhancing participation in visual data collection in online surveys: Evidence from an experimental study about remote work environments

Leyre Padilla, Melanie Revilla

RECSM - Universitat Pompeu Fabra, Spain

Video-Interviews in Mixed-Mode Panel Surveys: Selective Feasibility and Data Quality Trade-offs

Julia Witton¹, Carina Cornesse^1,2, Markus Grabka¹, Sabine Zinn^1,3

1: DIW Berlin, Germany; 2: GESIS Leibniz Institute for the Social Sciences, Germany; 3: Humboldt University of Berlin, Germany

Comparing Probability, Opt-In, and Synthetic Panels: A Case Study from the Netherlands

Carsten Broich¹, Nadica Stankovikj²

1: Norstat, Netherlands, The; 2: Lifepanel

Optimizing Panel Consent using Repeated Requests while Experimentally varying Request Placement and Panel Consent Incentives

Sebastian Hülle, Benjamin Baisch, Mustafa Coban, Marcel Müller, Lukas Olbrich, Stefan Schwarz

Institute for Employment Research (IAB), Germany

You’ve got Mail: Does sending Thank-you postcards increase response in a probability-based online panel?

Anne Balz², Julian Diefenbacher¹, Barbara Felderer¹, Phil-Adrian Klotz³, Jannis Kück³, Aline Mohr³, Tobias Rettig², Martin Spindler⁴

1: GESIS, Germany; 2: University of Mannheim, Germany; 3: Heinrich Heine Universität Düsseldorf, Germany; 4: University of Hamburg, Germany

Handling the Recruitment Process for a Probability Online Panel In-House: Insights and Lessons From the 2025 German Internet Panel Recruitment

Tobias Rettig, Carolin Bahm, Anne Balz, Benjamin Gröbe, Stefanie Schmidt

University of Mannheim, Germany

Methods to Maximize the Panel Consent Rate in the Recruitment Wave of a New Web Panel

Hülle Sebastian¹, Lukas Olbrich¹, Luisa Hammer¹, Katia Gallegos-Torres^1,2, Yuliya Kosyakova^1,3, Joseph W. Sakshaug^1,4,5

1: Institute for Employment Research (IAB), Germany; 2: ZEW Mannheim; 3: University of Bamberg; 4: LMU Munich; 5: University of Mannheim

Between the Waves: How additional studies shape panel participation trajectories.

Johannes Lemcke, Tim Kuttig, Alan Novaes Tump

Robert Koch-Institut, Germany

Is ‘don’t know’ good enough? Maximizing vs satisficing decision-making tendency as a predictor of survey satisficing

Hannah Schwärzel

Technical University Darmstadt, Germany

Measuring Response Effort and Satisficing with Paradata: A Process-Based Approach in the Czech GGS II

Daniel Dvorak

Masaryk university, Czechia

A Data-Driven Approach for Detecting Speeding Behavior in Online Surveys

Alan Novaes Tump, Tim Kuttig, Johannes Lemcke

Robert Koch Institute, Germany

Data donations in online panels: Factors influencing donation probability

Vanessa Lux¹, Jessica Daikeler¹, Laura Boeschoten², Bella Struminskaya²

1: GESIS - Leibniz Intitute for the Social Sciences, Germany; 2: Utrecht University

Motivations, Privacy, and Data Types: What Drives WhatsApp Chat Data Donation in a Probability Sample?”

Jessica Daikeler¹, Barbara Felderer¹, Julian Kohne¹, Carina Cornesse¹, Henning Silber³, Florian Keusch²

1: GESIS, Germany; 2: University of Mannheim, Germany; 3: University of Michigan, USA

Motivate and persuade: Testing strategies to increase participation in data donation studies

Florian Keusch¹, Frieder Rodewald^1,2, Valerie Hase³, Sebastian Prechsl^2,4, Frauke Kreuter⁴, Mark Trappmann²

1: University of Mannheim, Germany; 2: Institute for Employment Research, Germany; 3: University of Klagenfurt, Austria; 4: LMU Munich, Germany

The effects of push-to-complete reminders

Klara Persson, Sebastian Lundmark

The SOM Institute, University of Gothenburg, Sweden

The Effect of Survey Burden and Interval Between Survey Waves on Panel Participation: Experimental Evidence from the GLEN Panel

Manuela Schmidt¹, Claudia Schmiedeberg², Christiane Bozoyan², Henning Best¹

1: RPTU Kaiserslautern-Landau, Germany; 2: LMU Munich

Are interviewer administered follow-ups of web non-respondents still needed to maximise data quality? Evidence from Understanding Society: the UK Household Longitudinal Study

Gabriele Durrant¹, Jamie C. Moore², Pablo Cabrera Álvarez², Annette Jäckle², Peter, W.F. Smith¹, Jonathan Burton²

1: University of Southampton, United Kingdom; 2: University of Essex, United Kingdom

Introducing Web in a Telephone Employee Survey and its Impacts on Selection Bias and Costs

Joseph W. Sakshaug^1,2, Jan Mackeben¹

1: IAB; 2: LMU-Munich

Examining the influence of respondents' internet-related characteristics on mode choice (paper vs. web mode) in a probabilistic mixed-mode panel with push-to-web design

Lena Rembser

GESIS – Leibniz Institute for the Social Sciences, Germany

Data Quality in Push-to-Web Longitudinal Surveys: Evidence from ELSA's Transition to Sequential Mixed-Mode Design

Lina Lloyd, Rebecca Light, Maria Tsantani

National Centre for Social Research, United Kingdom