Las encuestas autoadministradas por InternetUn estudio de caso: "las familias adoptivas y sus estilos de vida"

  1. Rodríguez Jaume, María-José
  2. González Río, María-José
Revista:
Empiria: Revista de metodología de ciencias sociales

ISSN: 1139-5737

Ano de publicación: 2014

Número: 29

Páxinas: 155-175

Tipo: Artigo

DOI: 10.5944/EMPIRIA.29.2014.12944 DIALNET GOOGLE SCHOLAR lock_openDialnet editor

Outras publicacións en: Empiria: Revista de metodología de ciencias sociales

Resumo

In 2004 Spain becomes the second country in the world for international adoption, favouring a great visibility and social relevance of the adoptive family. The article presents the findings obtained through the administration online to Spanish adoptive parents of the web survey “Adoptive families and their lifestyles”. In particular, we expose the results obtained about attitudes, opinions and the perception of the social rule regarding the subject of adoption. This analysis allows us to explore the explanatory factors which determine that a subset of the population chooses adoption at the same time that it approaches us to the sociological understanding both of the increase of the adoptions in Spain and the adoptive families. Furthermore, the article presents the technical aspects related to the design and application of the online survey in order to demonstrate that, despite the typical limitations of this application, this sheds light on the process of international adoption, scarcely explored in the Spanish sociological research using surveys.

Referencias bibliográficas

  • ALBERDI, I. y ESCARIO, P. (2003): Flexibilidad, elección y estilos de vida familiar, Madrid, Ministerio de Trabajo y Asuntos Sociales.
  • ANDERSON, S., PIANTANIDA, M. y ANDERSON C. (1993): "Normal processes in adoptive families", en Normal family processes, Nueva York, Guilford, pp. 254-281.
  • BAATARD, G. (2012): "A technical Guide to effective and accessible Web surveys", Electronic Journal of Business Research Methods, 10(2), pp.101-109.
  • BECK, U. y BECK-GERNSHEIM, E. (2001): El normal caos del amor. Las nuevas formas de la relación amorosa, Barcelona, Paidós.
  • BECK, U. y BECK-GERNSHEIM, E. (2003): La individualización. El individualismo institucionalizado y sus consecuencias sociales y políticas, Barcelona, Paidós.
  • BOSNJAK, M., y TUTEN, T.L. (2003): "Prepaid and promised incentives in web surveys: An experiment", Social Science Computer Review, 21(2), pp.208-217.
  • CIS (1995): Encuesta de fecundidad y familia (FFS/ONU). Mujeres, Madrid, CIS, Estudio no2182.
  • CIS (2004a): Barómetro. Junio 2004, Madrid, CIS, Estudio no2.568.
  • CIS (2004b): Opiniones y actitudes sobre la familia, Madrid, CIS, Estudio no2.578.
  • CIS (2010): Barómetro de septiembre, Madrid, CIS, Estudio no2.844.
  • CHO, H. y LAROSE, R. (1999): "Privacy issues in internet surveys", Social Science Computer Review, 17(4), pp.421-434.
  • COUPER, M.P. (2000): "Web surveys: a review of issues and approaches", Public Opinion Quarterly, 64(4), pp.464-494.
  • COUPER, (2001): Web surveys: the questionnaire design challenge. University of Michigan, Survey Research Center, disponible en http://isi.cbs.nl/iamamember/CD2/pdf/263.PDF) [consulta:12-6-2013].
  • COUPER, (2008): Designing effective web surveys, Nueva York, Cambridge University Press.
  • COUPER, TRAUGOTT, M.W. y LAMIAS, M.J. (2001): "Web survey design and administration", Public Opinion Quarterly, 65(2), pp. 230-253.
  • COUPER y MILLER, P.V. (2008): "Web survey methods: introduction", Public Opinion Quarterly, 72(5), pp.831-835.
  • CRAWFORD, S.D., COUPER, M.P. y LAMIAS, M.J. (2001): "Web surveys perceptions of burden", Social Science Computer Review, 19(2), pp.146-162.
  • DAVE THOMAS FOUNDATION FOR ADOPTION (2002): National adoption attitudes survey, disponible en http://dciw4f53l7k9i.cloudfront.net/wp-content/uploads/2011/03/2002-Adoption-Exec-Summ.pdf [consulta:25-7-2014].
  • DAVE THOMAS FOUNDATION FOR ADOPTION (2013): National foster care adoption attitudes survey, disponible en http://dciw4f53l7k9i.cloudfront.net/wp-content/uploads/2013/07/DTFA-HarrisPoll-REPORT-USA-FINALl.pdf [consulta:25-7-2014].
  • DE LEEUW, E. (2008): "Choosing the method of data collection", en International handbook of survey methodology, Nueva York, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates and European Association of Methodology Series, pp.113-135.
  • DELGADO, M. (1993): "Cambios recientes en el proceso de formación de la familia", REIS, no 64, pp.125-153.
  • DELGADO, M. (coord.) (2007): Encuesta de fecundidad, familia y valores 2006, Madrid, CIS.
  • DÍAZ DE RADA, V. (2012): "Ventajas e inconvenientes de la encuesta por Internet", Papers, 97(1), pp.193-223.
  • DILLMAN, D.A. (2000): Mail and web-based surveys: the tailored design method, Nueva York, John Wiley & Sons.
  • DILLMAN, D.A., CALDWELL, S. y GANSEMER, M. (2000): Visual design effects on item nonresponse to a question about work satisfaction that precedes the Q-12 agree-disagree items, Gallup Research Report, disponible en http://sesrc.wsu.edu/dillman/papers/2000/visualdesigneffects.pdf [consulta:8-5-2013]
  • DILLMAN, D.A., SMYTH, J.D. y CHRISTIAN, L.M. (2009): Internet, mail, and mixed-mode surveys: the tailored design method, Nueva York, John Wiley (3ªed.).
  • FISHBEIN, M. y AJZEN, I. (1975): Belief, attitude, intention, and behavior: an introduction to theory and research, Reading, MA, Addison-Wesley.
  • GANASSALI, S. (2008): "The influence of the design of web survey questionnaires on the quality of responses", Survey Research Methods, 2(1), pp.21-32.
  • GRÄF, L. (2000): "Assessing internet questionnaires: the online pretest lab", en Online Social Sciences, Seattle, WA: Hogrefe & Huber, pp.73-93.
  • GROVES, R.M., CIALDINI, R.B. y COUPER, M.P. (1992): "Understanding the decision to participate in a survey", Public Opinion Quarterly, 56(4), pp. 475-495.
  • GUNN, H. (2002): "Web-based surveys: changing the survey process", First Monday Journal on the Internet, 7(12), disponible en http://www.firstmonday.org/ojs/index.php/fm/article/viewArticle/1014/935 [consulta:15-7-2013]
  • HOKSBERGEN, R.A.C. (1998): "Changes in motivation for adoption, value orientations and behavior in three generations of adoptive parents", Adoption Quarterly, 2(2), pp.37-55.
  • HOWARD, J. (2012): Untangling the web: the internet's transformative impact on adoption, Evan B. Donalson Adoption Institute, disponible en http://adoptioninstitute.org/publications/untangling-the-web-the-internets-transformative-impact-on-adoption/ [consulta:15-7-2014].
  • ISHIZAWA, H. y KUBO, K. (2013): "Factors affecting adoption decisions: child and parental characteristics", Journal of Family Issues, 35(5), pp.627-653.
  • JUSTE, MaG., RAMÍREZ, A. y BARBADILLO, P. (1991): Actitudes y opiniones de los españoles ante la infancia, Madrid, CIS, Estudios y Encuestas, no26.
  • KACZMIREK, L. (2005): "Web surveys. A brief guide on usability and implementation issues", en Usability Professionals 2005, German Chapter of the Usability Professionals Association e.V., pp.102-105.
  • LOZAR, K., BATAGELJ, Z. y VEHOVAR, V. (2002): "Design of web survey questionnaires: three basic experiments", Journal of Computer Mediated Communication, 7(3), disponible en http://jcmc.indiana.edu/vol7/issue3/vehovar.html [consulta:23-9-2013].
  • LLAURADÓ, O. (2006): "El trabajo de campo online: qué hemos aprendido en los últimos diez años", Investigación y Marketing, no91, pp.25-40.
  • MALM, K. y WELTI, K. (2010): "Exploring motivations to adopt", Adoption Quarterly, 13(3-4), pp.185-208.
  • MARRE, D. (2004): "La adopción internacional y las asociaciones de familias adoptantes: un ejemplo de sociedad civil virtual global", Scripta Nova, vol. VIII, no170(4), disponible en http://www.ub.edu/geocrit/sn/sn-170-4.htm [consulta:23-9-2013].
  • MEIL, G. (1999): La postmodernización de la familia española, Madrid, Acento.
  • MEIL, G. (2006): Padres e hijos en la España actual, Barcelona, Obra social "la Caixa".
  • MEIL, G. (2011): Individualismo y solidaridad familiar, Barcelona, Obra social "la Caixa".
  • MIALL, Ch.E. y MARCH, K. (2005): "Social support for changes in adoption practice: gay adoption, open adoption, birth reunions, and the release of confidential identifying information", Families in Society, 86(1), pp.83-92.
  • MOHANTY, J. (2013): "Attitudes toward adoption in Singapore", Journal of Family Issues, 35(5), pp.705-728.
  • NACIONES UNIDAS (2009): Child adoption: trends and policies, Nueva York, Naciones Unidades.
  • PARK, N.K. y WONCH, P. (2013): "Is adoption an option? The role of importance of motherhood and fertility help-seeking in considering adoption", Journal of Family Issues, 35(5), pp.601-626.
  • RAJU, S. (1999): "Study on social attitudes towards child adoption in Munbai", en White paper on adoptions, Catalysts for Social Action (CSA)-Pune, pp.7-10, disponible en http://www.csa.org.in/sites/default/files/WHITE-PAPER-ON-ADOPTIONS.pdf [consulta:25-7-2014].
  • RALEIGH, E. (2012): "Are same-sex and single adoptive parents more likely to adopt transracially? A national analysis of race, family structure, and the adoption marketplace", Sociological Perspectives, 55(3), pp. 449-471.
  • RODRÍGUEZ, J. (2005): Métodos de muestreo. Casos prácticos, Madrid, CIS (2ªed.).
  • RODRÍGUEZ, MaJ. (2012): "Las 'transiciones demográficas' en la segunda modernidad", en Problemas actuales de salud reproductiva, familia, género y sexualidad, Buenos Aires, PNUD/UNFPA y Biblos, pp.83-106.
  • RUIZ, D. (2004): "Nuevas formas familiares", Portularia, no 4, pp.219-230.
  • SÁNCHEZ J.J. y SEGOVIA, J.M. (2008): "La participación y la influencia del recordatorio en las encuetas panel on line a estudiantes universitarios", Empiria, no16, pp.135-161.
  • SELMAN, P. (2006): "Trends in intercountry adoption: analysis of data from 20 receiving countries, 1998-2004", Journal of Population Research, 23(2), pp. 183-204.
  • SHROPSHIRE, K.O., HAWDON, J.E. y WITTE, J.C. (2009): "Web survey design: balancing measurement, response, and topical interest", Sociological Methods and Research, 37(3), pp.343-370.
  • TOURANGEAU, R., COUPER, M.P. y CONRAD, F. (2004): "Spacing, position, and order. Interpretive heuristics for visual features of survey questions", Public Opinion Quarterly, 68(3), pp.368-393.
  • TYEBJEE, T. (2003): "Attitude, interest, and motivation for adoption and foster care", Child Welfare, 82(6), pp.685-706.
  • VAN LANINGHAM, J.L., SCHEUBLE, L.K. y JOHNSON, D.R. (2012): "Social factors predicting women's consideration of adoption", Michigan Family Review, 16(1), pp.1-21.
  • VICENTE, P. y REIS, E. (2010): "Using questionnaire design to fight nonresponse bias in web surveys", Social Science Computer Review, 28(2), pp.251-267.
  • YAN, T., CONRAD, F.G., TOUTANGEAU, R. y COUPER, M.O. (2011): "Should I stay or should I go: the effects of progress feedback, promised task duration and length of questionnaire on completing web surveys", International Journal of Public Opinion Research, 23(2), pp.131-147.
  • YUN, G.W. y TRUMBO, C.W. (2000): "Comparative response to a survey executed by post, e-mail, & web form", Journal of Computer Mediated Communication, 6(1), disponible en http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1083-6101.2000.tb00112.x/full [consulta:18-10-2013].
  • WAHL, S.T., MCBRIDE, M.C. y SCHRODT, P. (2005): "Becoming 'point and click' parents: a case study of communication and online adoption", Journal of Family Communication, 5(4), pp.279-294.
Fonte de datos: Dialnet