Recreation Participation and Conservation Attitudes: Differences Between Mail and Online Respondents in a Mixed-Mode Survey

This study reports a comparison of demographics, outdoor recreation activity patterns, and attitudes toward conservation issues collected via mail and online survey methods within a mixed-mode survey. Pennsylvania residents, randomly sampled by Survey Sampling, Inc., were invited in a pre-survey letter to complete the survey online, or through a paper survey mailed to their homes. Differences in outdoor recreation participation were generally small for wildlife-related activities, and were greater among non-wildlife-related outdoor recreation activities, with the Internet respondents generally reporting higher rates of participation. Analyses controlling for demographic variables showed a confounding influence on the relationships examined. Internet respondents tended to be younger, better educated, and more affluent. Conservation- related attitudes did not differ between the mail and online survey respondents and were more weakly related to demographic factors. Results suggest that online surveys can yield valid results when using appropriate sampling designs and implementing quality control procedures.

[1]  Larry M. Gigliotti.  Comparison of an Internet Versus Mail Survey: A Case Study , 2011 .

[2]  Adam N. Joinson,et al.  Personalized salutation, power of sender and response rates to Web-based surveys , 2007, Comput. Hum. Behav..

[3]  Russel L. Thompson,et al.  A Meta-Analysis of Response Rates in Web- or Internet-Based Surveys , 2000 .

[4]  Peter V. Miller,et al.  Web Survey Methods Introduction , 2008 .

[5]  Alex R. Trouteaud.  How You Ask Counts , 2004 .

[6]  Virginia M. Lesser,et al.  Assessing Hunters' Opinions Based on a Mail and a Mixed-Mode Survey , 2011 .

[7]  Stephen R. Porter,et al.  E-mail Subject Lines and Their Effect on Web Survey Viewing and Response , 2005 .

[8]  F. Langerak,et al.  Non-Probability Sampling for WWW Surveys: A Comparison of Methods , 1998 .

[9]  Holly M. Miller,et al.  Appropriate Uses and Considerations for Online Surveying in Human Dimensions Research , 2011 .

[10]  G. Loosveldt,et al.  The effect of personalization on response rates and data quality in web surveys , 2005 .

[11]  T. L. Brown,et al.  Factors Affecting Response Rates to Natural Resource - Focused Mail Surveys: Empirical Evidence of Declining Rates Over Time , 2003 .

[12]  N. W. Pirie,et al.  Conservation and natural resources , 1966 .

[13]  M. Duda,et al.  The Fallacy of Online Surveys: No Data Are Better Than Bad Data , 2010 .

[14]  J. Vaske.  Survey Research and Analysis: Applications in Parks, Recreation and Human Dimensions , 2008 .

[15]  Peter Tuckel,et al.  The Vanishing Respondent In Telephone Surveys , 2002, Journal of Advertising Research.

[16]  James C. Witte,et al.  Introduction to the Special Issue on Web Surveys , 2009 .

[17]  M. Couper.  A REVIEW OF ISSUES AND APPROACHES , 2000 .

[18]  Angela P. Wetzel.  Internet, mail, and mixed‐mode surveys: The tailored design method , 2010 .

[19]  Marrett D. Grund,et al.  Assessing Deer Hunter Attitudes Toward Regulatory Change Using Self-Selected Respondents , 2011 .

[20]  J. Vaske,et al.  Can Weighting Compensate for Sampling Issues in Internet Surveys? , 2011 .

[21]  K. Manfreda,et al.  Web Surveys versus other Survey Modes: A Meta-Analysis Comparing Response Rates , 2008 .

[22]  Shu Tian Cole.  Comparing Mail and Web-Based Survey Distribution Methods: Results of Surveys to Leisure Travel Retailers , 2005 .

[23]  Joseph M. Penkala.  Internet vs. Access Point Intercept Survey to Obtain Stakeholder Information , 2004 .

[24]  Michael D. Kaplowitz,et al.  A Comparison of Web and Mail Survey Response Rates , 2004 .

[25]  Tse-Hua Shih,et al.  Comparing Response Rates from Web and Mail Surveys: A Meta-Analysis , 2008 .