MAIL SURVEY RESPONSE RATE A META-ANALYSIS OF SELECTED TECHNIQUES FOR INDUCING RESPONSE

This article reports the results of a meta-analysis of experimental studies which have examined ten different factors felt to influence response rates to mail surveys. The form of meta- analysis used clearly defines the individual impact of each of the factors examined. Results indicate that prenotification and follow-ups increase the response rate, as does the type of outgo- ing postage used. Furthermore, studies sponsored by a university receive greater returns. Increases in the size of the monetary incentive used appear to have decreasing marginal gains. Finally, some evidence exists to suggest that the color of the question- naire influences response rate. The extensive use of mail surveys coupled with the low response rates typically encountered has made the issue of mail survey response rate improvement an intriguing topic. High response rates have the obvi- ous benefits of increased sample size, reduced costs associated with follow-up contacts, and reduced concern over nonresponse bias. Many experiments have been conducted to measure the effectiveness of one or more of the factors expected to influence response rates. The purpose of this paper is to apply a form of meta-analysis to reported experimental findings to isolate and estimate the individual impact of several typical response rate enhancement techniques. The meta-analysis technique used avoids the problems associated with past similar efforts but is more restrictive in the factors which can be exam-

[1]  E. H. Carpenter.  Personalizing Mail SurveysA Replication and Reassessment , 1974 .

[2]  Jagdish N. Sheth,et al.  Follow-up Methods, Questionnaire Length, and Market Differences in Mail Surveys , 1975 .

[3]  C. Hendrick,et al.  Effectiveness of ingratiation tactics in a cover letter on mail questionnaire response , 1972 .

[4]  O. C. Ferrell,et al.  Response Rates and Perceived Questionnaire Length in Mail Surveys , 1979 .

[5]  James R. Harris,et al.  Questionnaire Returns: Stamps versus Business Reply Envelopes Revisited , 1978 .

[6]  John F. Veiga,et al.  Getting the mail questionnaire returned: Some practical research considerations. , 1974 .

[7]  Dan H. Robertson,et al.  A New Method of Increasing Mail Survey Responses: Contributions to Charity , 1978 .

[8]  Wayne Lee.  EXperimental design and analysis , 1975 .

[9]  Hershey H. Friedman,et al.  Effect of ethnicity of signature on the rate of return and content of a mail questionnaire. , 1975 .

[10]  C. G. Walters,et al.  The Effect On Return Rate of Messages Explaining Monetary Incentives in Mail Questionnaire Studies , 1976 .

[11]  J. E. Swan,et al.  Anonymity and Response by Salespeople to a Mail Questionnaire , 1977 .

[12]  Don A. Dillman,et al.  Contribution of personalization to mail questionnaire response as an element of a previously tested method. , 1974 .

[13]  Gilbert A. Churchill,et al.  The determinants of salesperson performance: A meta-analysis. , 1985 .

[14]  O. C. Ferrell,et al.  A Reassessment of the Effects of Appeals on Response to Mail Surveys , 1980 .

[15]  R. Rosenthal.  Meta-analytic procedures for social research , 1984 .

[16]  Ward S. Mason,et al.  LIVING RESEARCHAN EXPERIMENTAL STUDY OF FACTORS AFFECTING RESPONSE TO A MAIL SURVEY OF BEGINNING TEACHERS , 1961 .

[17]  Michael S. Goodstadt,et al.  Mail Survey Response Rates: Their Manipulation and Impact , 1977 .

[18]  Michael J. Houston,et al.  The Negative Effects of Personalization on Response Patterns in Mail Surveys , 1975 .

[19]  T. Vocino,et al.  Three Variables in Stimulating Responses to Mailed Questionnaires , 1977 .

[20]  Andrew E. Kimball.  Increasing the Rate of Return in Mail Surveys , 1961 .

[21]  J. Gullahorn,et al.  AN INVESTIGATION OF THE EFFECTS OF THREE FACTORS ON RESPONSE TO MAIL QUESTIONNAIRES , 1963 .

[22]  H. S. Feild.  Effects of sex of investigator on mail survey response rates and response bias. , 1975 .

[23]  Don A. Dillman,et al.  INCREASING MAIL QUESTIONNAIRE RESPONSE IN LARGE SAMPLES OF THE GENERAL PUBLIC , 1972 .

[24]  Hershey H. Friedman,et al.  The effects of a monetary incentive and the ethnicity of the sponsor's signature on the rate and quality of response to A mail survey , 1979 .

[25]  David Labrecque,et al.  A Response Rate Experiment Using Mail Questionnaires , 1978 .

[26]  Anton J. Nederhof,et al.  The Effects of Material Incentives in Mail Surveys: Two Studies , 1983 .

[27]  K. Tedin,et al.  The Effect of Cost and Importance Factors on the Return Rate for Single and Multiple Mailings , 1982 .

[28]  J. Scott Armstrong,et al.  Return Postage in Mail Surveys: A Meta Analysis , 1987 .

[29]  R. Stevens.  Does Precoding Mail Questionnaires Affect Response Rates , 1974 .

[30]  R. Wildman,et al.  Effects of Anonymity and Social Setting on Survey Responses , 1977 .

[31]  Gerald Linda,et al.  Multiple Criteria Effects in a Mail Survey Experiment , 1978 .

[32]  John R. Nevin,et al.  The Effects of Source and Appeal on Mail Survey Response Patterns , 1977 .

[33]  J. B. Kernan.  ARE “BULK-RATE OCCUPANTS” REALLY UNRESPONSIVE? , 1971 .

[34]  Jacob Hornik,et al.  Time Cue and Time Perception Effect on Response to Mail Surveys , 1981 .

[35]  Jr. James R. Henley.  Response Rate to Mail Questionnaires with a Return Deadline , 1976 .

[36]  William J. Whitmore.  Mail Survey Premiums and Response Bias , 1976 .

[37]  R. Forthofer,et al.  Further Evidence on Using a Deadline to Stimulate Responses to a Mail Survey; Readership and Coverage of Science and Technology in Newspapers; The Uses and Gratifications Approach to Mass Communications Research , 1979 .

[38]  L. M. Aleamoni,et al.  Effect of Personal Signature on the Initial Rate of Return of a Mailed Questionnaire. , 1971 .

[39]  Klaus Eichner,et al.  Predicting Reponse Rates to Mailed Questionnaires , 1981 .

[40]  D. R. Berdie.  Questionnaire length and response rate. , 1973 .

[41]  S. Huck,et al.  Using monetary inducements to increase response rates from mailed surveys: A replication and extension of previous research. , 1974 .

[42]  Kevin F. McCrohan,et al.  A Cost/benefit Approach to Postage used on Mail Questionnaires , 1981 .

[43]  Richard K. Burdick,et al.  Advance Correspondence and Error in Mail Surveys , 1977 .

[44]  David L. Rados,et al.  Effects of Foot-in-the-Door, Cash Incentives, and Followups on Survey Response , 1981 .

[45]  T. Heberlein,et al.  Factors affecting response rates to mailed questionnaires: A quantitative analysis of the published literature. , 1978 .

[46]  A. S. Linsky.  STIMULATING RESPONSES TO MAILED QUESTIONNAIRES: A REVIEW , 1975 .

[47]  R. Parsons,et al.  THE EFFECT OF ADVANCE NOTICE IN MAIL SURVEYS OF HOMOGENEOUS GROUPS , 1972 .

[48]  Frederick Wiseman,et al.  Factor Interaction Effects in Mail Survey Response Rates , 1973 .

[49]  Bruce J. Walker,et al.  Effects of alternative follow-up procedures on mail survey response rates. , 1974 .

[50]  W. S. Blumenfeld.  Effect of Appearance of Correspondence on Response Rate to a Mail Questionnaire Survey , 1973 .

[51]  J. Armstrong.  Monetary Incentives in Mail Surveys , 1975 .

[52]  M. A. Mcginnis,et al.  Mail Survey Response Rate and Bias: The Effect of Home versus Work Address , 1977 .

[53]  P. Erdos,et al.  Visible vs. disguised keying on questionnaires. , 1977 .

[54]  J. Hinrichs.  Effects of sampling, follow-up letters, and commitment to participation on mail attitude survey response. , 1975 .

[55]  Robert A. Hansen,et al.  Testing the Effectiveness of Alternative Foot-in-the-Door Manipulations , 1980 .

[56]  J. Goyder,et al.  Further Evidence on Factors Affecting Response Rates to Mailed Questionnaires , 1982 .

[57]  J. R. Lang,et al.  Sample Composition Bias and Response Bias in a Mail Survey: A Comparison of Inducement Methods , 1980 .

[58]  James E. Stafford.  Influence of Preliminary Contact on Mail Returns , 1966 .

[59]  Robert A. Hansen,et al.  A Self-Perception Interpretation of the Effect of Monetary and Nonmonetary Incentives on Mail Survey Respondent Behavior , 1980 .

[60]  Alan R. Andreasen.  PERSONALIZING MAIL QUESTIONNAIRE CORRESPONDENCE , 1970 .

[61]  Waldemar M. Goulet.  Efficacy of a Third Request Letter in Mail Surveys of Professionals , 1977 .

[62]  Carol H. Fuller,et al.  Effect of anonymity on return rate and response bias in a mail survey. , 1974 .

[63]  C. Allen,et al.  More on Self-Perception Theory's Foot Technique in the Pre-Call/Mail Survey Setting , 1980 .

[64]  Thomas R. Wotruba,et al.  Monetary Inducements and Mail Questionnaire Response , 1966 .

[65]  G. Glass,et al.  Meta-analysis in social research , 1981 .

[66]  S. Mazzuca,et al.  Does patient education in chronic disease have therapeutic value? , 1982, Journal of chronic diseases.

[67]  R. Belk.  1984 AMA educators' proceedings , 1984 .

[68]  David W. Stewart,et al.  Monetary Incentives versus Promised Contribution to Charity: New Evidence on Mail Survey Response , 1982 .

[69]  Robert A. Peterson,et al.  An experimental investigation of mail-survey responses , 1975 .

[70]  Neil M. Ford.  The Advance Letter in Mail Surveys , 1967 .

[71]  J. S. Mizes,et al.  Incentives for Increasing Return Rates: Magnitude Levels, Response Bias, amd Format , 1984 .

[72]  Eli P. Cox,et al.  Reappraising Mail Survey Response Rates , 1974 .

[73]  J. Hackler,et al.  DOLLARS, DISSONANCE, AND SURVEY RETURNS , 1973 .

[74]  G. A. Roeher.  EFFECTIVE TECHNIQUES IN INCREASING RESPONSE TO MAILED QUESTIONNAIRES , 1963 .

[75]  A. Harrison,et al.  Personalization of Mail Surveys: Too Much of a Good Thing? , 1984 .

[76]  David J. Pucel,et al.  Questionnaire Follow Up Returns as a Function of Incentives and Responder Characteristics. , 1971 .

[77]  M. Pressley,et al.  Care needed when selecting response inducements in mail surveys of commercial populations , 1978 .

[78]  L. Kanuk,et al.  Mail Surveys and Response Rates: A Literature Review , 1975 .

[79]  D. Dillman.  Mail and telephone surveys : the total design method , 1979 .

[80]  W. Tullar,et al.  A Factor Interactive Investigation of Mail Survey Response Rates from a Commercial Population , 1977 .