Welcome!

I am a doctoral researcher at GESIS, Leibniz Institute for the Social Sciences. I’m also a PhD student in Survey Methodology and Statistics in Utrecht University. My current work revolves around panel conditioning and data integration and quality measures.

Research

Work in Progress

• Monitoring Attitudes Over Time–Real Change or the Result of Repeated Interviewing? (with Peter Lugtig, Bella Struminskaya, Henning Silber, Bernd Weiss, Michael Bosnjak)
  Conditionally accepted at Sociological Methods & Research
  [Click here for Abstract]

  Researchers often use panel data to study change and stability of social patterns. However, repeated interviewing can affect respondents’ attitudes in a panel study by raising awareness and triggering reflection processes on surveyed topics (cognitive stimulus hypothesis). We investigated change in respondents’ attitudes about abortion and the underlying mechanisms of attitude change across six waves using data from a survey experiment administered within a probability-based and a non-probability panel in Germany. We manipulated the frequency of receiving identical attitude questions on the same issue. We estimated multiple-group and longitudinal structural equation models to differentiate change in the measurement of reported attitudes from “real” attitude change. We show that repeatedly asking about abortion increases the reliability of respondents’ reported abortion attitudes, providing support for the cognitive stimulus hypothesis. Our results also suggest that improved response behavior due to general survey experience further enhances attitude reliability when answering identical attitude questions repeatedly.
  
  

Publications

• Kraemer, Fabienne, Henning Silber, Bella Struminskaya, Matthias Sand, Michael Bosnjak, Joanna Koßmann, and Bernd Weiß. 2024. “Panel Conditioning in a Probability-Based Longitudinal Study: A Comparison of Respondents with Different Levels of Survey Experience."
  Journal of Survey Statistics and Methodology 12 (1): 36–59. https://doi.org/10.1093/jssam/smad004
  

  [Click here for Abstract]

  Learning effects due to repeated interviewing, also known as panel conditioning, are a major threat to response quality in later waves of a panel study. To date, research has not provided a clear picture regarding the circumstances, mechanisms, and dimensions of potential panel conditioning effects. In particular, the effects of conditioning frequency, that is, different levels of experience within a panel, on response quality are underexplored. Against this background, we investigated the effects of panel conditioning by using data from the GESIS Panel, a German mixed-mode probability-based panel study. Using two refreshment samples, we compared three panel cohorts with differing levels of experience on several response quality indicators related to the mechanisms of reflection, satisficing, and social desirability. Overall, we find evidence for both negative (i.e., disadvantageous for response quality) and positive (i.e., advantageous for response quality) panel conditioning. Highly experienced respondents were more likely to satisfice by speeding through the questionnaire. They also had a higher probability of refusing to answer sensitive questions than less experienced panel members. However, more experienced respondents were also more likely to optimize the response process by needing less time compared to panelists with lower experience levels (when controlling for speeding). In contrast, we did not find significant differences with respect to the number of “don’t know” responses, nondifferentiation, the selection of first response categories and mid-responses, and the number of nontriggered filter questions. Of the observed differences, speeding showed the highest magnitude with an average increase of 6.0 percentage points for highly experienced panel members compared to low experienced panelists.

• Kraemer, Fabienne, Henning Silber, Bella Struminskaya, Matthias Sand, Michael Bosnjak, Joanna Koßmann, and Bernd Weiß. 2023. “Satisficing Response Behavior Across Time: Assessing Negative Panel Conditioning Using an Experimental Design with Six Repetitions."
  Survey Research Methods 17 (3): 269-300. https://doi.org/10.18148/srm/2023.v17i3.7986
  

  [Click here for Abstract]

  Satisficing response behavior can be a threat to the quality of survey responses. Past research has provided broad empirical evidence on the existence of satisficing and its consequences on data quality, however, relatively little is known about the extent of satisficing over the course of a panel study and its impact on response quality in later waves. Drawing on panel conditioning research, we use question design experiments to investigate whether learning effects across waves of a panel study cause changes in the extent of satisficing and if so, whether general survey experience (learning of the survey process) or familiarity with specific question con- tents (learning of the questionnaire content) accounts for those changes. We use data from a longitudinal survey experiment comprising six panel waves administered within a German non- probability online access panel. To investigate the underlying mechanism of possible learning effects, the experimental study randomly assigned respondents to different frequencies of re- ceiving identical question contents over the six panel waves. Our results show the existence of satisficing in every panel wave, which is in its magnitude similar to the extent of satisficing in the probability-based GESIS Panel that we use as a benchmark study. However, we did not find changes in the extent of satisficing across panel waves, nor did we find moderation effects of the interval between the waves, respondents’ cognitive ability, or motivation. Additional validity analyses showed that satisficing does not only affect the distribution of individual estimates by 15 percent or more but also can have an effect on associations between variables.

Address:
GESIS, Leibniz Institute for the Social Sciences
B6 4-5, 68159 Mannheim
Germany