Comparison of Online Probability Panels in Europe: New Trends and Old Challenges in the Era of Open Science

Luciana Taddei (), Dario Germani, Nicolò Marchesini, Rocco Paolillo, Claudia Pennacchiotti, Ilaria Primerano, Michele Santurro and Loredana Cerbara
Additional contact information
Luciana Taddei: Institute for Research on Population and Social Policies, Italian National Research Council (CNR-IRPPS), 00185 Rome, Italy
Dario Germani: Institute for Research on Population and Social Policies, Italian National Research Council (CNR-IRPPS), 00185 Rome, Italy
Nicolò Marchesini: Italian National Institute of Statistics (Istat), 00198 Rome, Italy
Rocco Paolillo: Institute for Research on Population and Social Policies, Italian National Research Council (CNR-IRPPS), 00185 Rome, Italy
Claudia Pennacchiotti: Institute for Research on Population and Social Policies, Italian National Research Council (CNR-IRPPS), 00185 Rome, Italy
Ilaria Primerano: Institute for Research on Population and Social Policies, Italian National Research Council (CNR-IRPPS), 00185 Rome, Italy
Michele Santurro: Institute for Research on Population and Social Policies, Italian National Research Council (CNR-IRPPS), 00185 Rome, Italy
Loredana Cerbara: Institute for Research on Population and Social Policies, Italian National Research Council (CNR-IRPPS), 00185 Rome, Italy

Societies, 2025, vol. 15, issue 8, 1-16

Abstract: Online Probability Panels (OPPs) have emerged as essential research infrastructures for social sciences, offering robust tools for longitudinal analysis and evidence-based policy-making. However, the growing role of the Open Science movement demands systematic evaluation of their compliance. This study compares major European OPPs—including LISS, GESIS, the GIP, ELIPSS, and the Swedish and Norwegian Citizen Panels—focusing on their practices of openness, recruitment, sampling, and maintenance. Through a qualitative analysis of public documentation and methodological reports, the study examines how their diverse approaches influence data accessibility, inclusivity, and long-term usability. Our findings highlight substantial variability across panels, reflecting the interplay between national contexts, governance models, technological infrastructures, and methodological choices related to recruitment, sampling, and panel maintenance. Some panels demonstrate stronger alignment with Open Science values—promoting transparency, interoperability, and inclusive engagement—while others operate within more constrained frameworks shaped by institutional or structural limitations. This comparative analysis contributes to the understanding of OPPs as evolving knowledge infrastructures and provides a reference framework for future panel development. In doing so, it offers valuable insights for enhancing the role of OPPs in advancing open and socially engaged research practices.

Keywords: online probability panels; FAIR principles; Open Science; research infrastructures; social science data; digital social research; data-based approach (search for similar items in EconPapers)
JEL-codes: A13 A14 P P0 P1 P2 P3 P4 P5 Z1 (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2025
References: Add references at CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
https://www.mdpi.com/2075-4698/15/8/210/pdf (application/pdf)
https://www.mdpi.com/2075-4698/15/8/210/ (text/html)

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:gam:jsoctx:v:15:y:2025:i:8:p:210-:d:1712923

Access Statistics for this article

Societies is currently edited by Ms. Farrah Sun

More articles in Societies from MDPI
Bibliographic data for series maintained by MDPI Indexing Manager ().