Miscellany: The Effect of using Questionnaire Identification Code and Message about Non-Response Follow-Up Plans on Mail Survey Response Characteristics

Steady decline in survey participation has increased the importance of finding methods to improve survey response (Steeh 1981). This is particularly true for mail surveys. Mail delivery of questionnaires is extensively utilised because of its low cost, geographic flexibility, and time convenience (Kanuk & Berenson 1975). Perhaps for this reason, a major segment of the market research industry focuses on use of mail surveys (Frankel 1989). While they are economical, however, mail surveys produce relatively low response rates. For example, one review found that the average response rate to mail surveys is 47% – almost half as effective as either telephone (72%) or personal interview (82%) surveys (Yu & Cooper 1983).

[1]  M. Crask,et al.  MAIL SURVEY RESPONSE RATE A META-ANALYSIS OF SELECTED TECHNIQUES FOR INDUCING RESPONSE , 1988 .

[2]  Sanford Grossbart,et al.  Influence of Involvement, Commitment and Familiarity on Brand Beliefs and Attitudes of Viewers Exposed to Alternative Ad Claim Strategies , 1988 .

[3]  Bruce J. Walker,et al.  A method to improve response to industrial mail surveys , 1987 .

[4]  J. Leigh,et al.  “Don't Know” Item Nonresponse in a Telephone Survey: Effects of Question Form and Respondent Characteristics , 1987 .

[5]  Gerald Albaum,et al.  Do source and anonymity affect mail survey results , 1987 .

[6]  Gary Blau,et al.  Conceptualizing How Job Involvement and Organizational Commitment Affect Turnover and Absenteeism , 1987 .

[7]  C. W. Park,et al.  Consumer Response to Television Commercials: The Impact of Involvement and Background Music on Brand Attitude Formation , 1986 .

[8]  R. Arora.  Involvement: Its measurement for retail store research , 1985 .

[9]  G. Laurent,et al.  Consumer Involvement Profiles: A New and Practical Approach to Consumer Involvement , 1985 .

[10]  G. Laurent,et al.  Measuring Consumer Involvement Profiles , 1985 .

[11]  H. Cooper,et al.  A Quantitative Review of Research Design Effects on Response Rates to Questionnaires , 1983 .

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

[13]  Charles M. Futrell.  Effects of signed versus unsigned attitude questionnaires , 1981 .

[14]  J. Brehm.  A theory of psychological reactance. , 1981 .

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

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

[17]  C. Steeh.  Trends in Nonresponse Rates, 1952–1979 , 1981 .

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

[19]  F. Wiseman,et al.  Toward the development of industry standards for response and nonresponse rates , 1980 .

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

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

[22]  Donald E. Stem,et al.  Effects of signed versus unsigned internally administered questionnaires for managers , 1978 .

[23]  K. Weick.  Mail and telephone surveys: The total design method. , 1978 .

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

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

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

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

[28]  Allen Michel,et al.  The Researcher's Sample: A Review of the Choice of Respondents in Marketing Research , 1976 .

[29]  R. T. Hise,et al.  Evaluating the effects of anonymous respondents on mail survey results , 1976 .

[30]  John R. Nevin,et al.  Effects of a deadline and a veiled threat on mail survey responses. , 1976 .

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

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

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

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

[35]  Richard P. Butler,et al.  Effects of signed and unsigned questionnaires for both sensitive and nonsensitive items. , 1973 .

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

[37]  F. W. King.  Anonymous versus identifiable questionnaires in drug usage surveys. , 1970, The American psychologist.

[38]  P. Blau.  Exchange and Power in Social Life , 1964 .

[39]  G. C. Homans,et al.  Social Behavior: Its Elementary Forms. , 1975 .

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