Collecting Data on Ego-Centered Social Networks on the Web (AOIR2003)

Collecting Data on Ego-Centered Social Networks on the Web Gašper Koren, Vesna Dolničar Katja Lozar Manfreda, Vasja Vehovar, and Valentina Hlebec [Faculty of Social Sciences, University of Ljubljana] Internet Research Toronto, 16. october 2003 4. 0

Presentation outline

Aim of the study

Collecting data on ego-centered social networks

Data collection

Results

Conclusions

Further research

http://websm.org/

Aim of the study http://websm.org/

To t est some relevant methodological issues for collecting data on complex issues with self-administered survey methods (Web Survey):

1. Influence of graphical design

2. Way of collecting data on ‘repeating’ questions

http://websm.org/ EGO Vesna Gašper Mat Val Mick Vasja Katja

Network Generator

Special question for respondent (EGO) to report on his social network (ALTERS)

In our case: measuring social support

http://websm.org/ “ From time to time, most people discuss important personal matters with other people, for instance if they have problems at work, at university, with partner or parents or other similar situations. Who are the people with whom you discuss personal matters that are important to you? “ ( emotional support)

Data collection http://websm.org/

July - October 2001

RIS – Research on Internet in Slovenia Web Survey

Over 14.000 respondents

Survey I.

August - September 2003

Special Survey on Social Networks

300 respondents

some preliminary results will be presented here

Survey II.

Survey I. (2001) http://websm.org/

1000 respondents

4 different network generators (measuring 4 different types of social support), 1 graphical design

Ego should answer 11 questions for every listed alter (alter-vise questioning)

Survey II. (2003) http://websm.org/

300 respondents

1 network generator, 3 different graphical designs ( 10 n.s. , 5 n.s. , 1 n.s. )

2 ways of collecting data on alters

(alter-vise vs. variable-vise)

Number of listed alters I. http://websm.org/

Survey I. (2001)

graphical design with 30 name spaces

varying instructions (long vs. short)

Number of listed alters II. http://websm.org/

30 name spaces | 10 name spaces

max 30 13

mean 6.4 4.66

Heaping

Number of listed alters III. http://websm.org/

max 13 14

mean 4.66 4.06

p = 0.1

Heaping

Number of listed alters IV. http://websm.org/

max 14 16

mean 4.06 3.15

p = 0.01

Average number of completed name interpreters (Survey I.) http://websm.org/

Average number of completed name interpreters (Survey II.) http://websm.org/

Conclusions http://websm.org/

Graphical design is highly suggestive!

Design with one name space per screen has the best outperformance (closest to other survey modes)

Variable-vise questioning performs better than Alter-vise (however both have high drop-off rate!)

Web data collection mode can be used for collecting ego-centered data, however one should be aware of all disadvantages of this data collection mode

Further research http://websm.org/

How-to r educe number of additional questions on alters without reducing qualitiy of collected data

Time needed for each type of answering questionaitre (Alter-vise vs. Variable-vise)

University of Ljubljana Faculty of Social Sciences http://www.websm.org/ http://www.ris.org/ http://www.fdv.uni-lj.si/ gasper@ris.org Contact and aditional information WebSM