Sollicitation de participation à une enquête par courriel: Effet de la présence sociale et de l'attrait physique du demandeur sur le taux de réponse

Canadian Journal of Behavioural Science

Volumn 35, Issue 2, 2003, Pages 84-96

  Guéguen, Nicolas ^c   Legohérel, Patrick ^a   Jacob, Céline ^b  

^a UNIVERSITÉ D'ANGERS   (France)

^b UNIVERSITÉ DE RENNES 1   (France)

^c NONE

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 0037396171     PISSN: 0008400X     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1037/h0087191     Document Type: Review

References (71)

1. Ahearne, M., Gruen, T., & Burke-Jarvis, C. (1999). If looks could sell: Moderation and mediation of the attractiveness effect on salesperson performance. International Journal of Research in Marketing, 16, 269-284.
2. Ainscough, T. & Motley, C. (2000). Will you help me please? The effects of race, gender and manner of dress on retail service. Marketing Letters, 11, 129-136.
3. Ambra, (D') J., Rice, D., & O'Connor, M. (1998). Computer-mediated communication and media preference: An investigation of the dimentionality of perceived task equivocability and media richness. Behaviour and Information Technology, 17, 164-174.
4. Anderson, S., & Gansneder, M. (1995). Using electronic mail surveys and computer-monitored data for studying computer-mediated communication systems. Social Science Computer Review, 13, 33-46.
5. Babbie, E. (1990). Survey research methods (2nd ed.). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.
6. Bachmann, D., Elfrink, J., & Vazzana, G. (1996). Tracking the progress of email vs. snail mail. Marketing Research, 8, 30-36.
7. Benson, P., Karabenick, S., & Lerner, R. (1976). Pretty pleases: The effect of physical attractiveness, race, and sex on receiving help. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 12, 406-415.
8. Bickman, L. (1974). Sex and helping behavior. The Journal of Social Psychology, 92, 43-53.
9. Bickman, L., & Kamzan, M. (1973). The effect of race and need on helping behavior. The Journal of Social Psychology, 89, 73-77.
10. Booth-Kewley, S., Edwards, J., & Rosenfeld, P. (1992). Impression management, social desirability, and computer administration of attitude questionnaires: Does the computer make a difference? Journal of Applied Psychology, 77, 562-566.
11. Bordia, P. (1996). Studying verbal interaction on the Internet: The case of rumor transmission research. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments & Computers, 28, 149-151.
12. Brennan, M., Rae, N., & Parackal, M. (1998). Survey-based experimental research via the Web: Some observations. New Zealand Marketing Academy Proceedings, 223-233.
13. Bull, R., & Gibson-Robinson, E. (1981). The influence of eye-gaze, style of dress, and locality on the amounts of money donated to a charity. Human Relations, 34, 895-905.
14. Chaiken, S. (1979). Communicator physical attractiveness and persuasion. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 37, 1387-1397.
15. Cialdini, R., Cacioppo, J., Basset, R., & Miller, J. (1978). Low-ball procedure for producing compliance: Commitment then cost. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 36, 463-476.
16. Cialdini, R., Vincent, J., Lewis, S., Catalan, J., Wheeler, D., & Lee-Darby, B. (1975). Reciprocal concessions procedure for inducing compliance: The door-in-the-face technique. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 31, 206-215.
17. Comber, C., Colley, A., Hargreaves, D., & Dorn L. (1997). The effects of age, gender and computer experience upon computer attitudes. Educational Research, 39, 123-133.
18. Couper, M., Blair, J., & Triplett, T. (1999). A comparison of mail and email for a survey of employees in U.S. statistical agencies. Journal of Official Statistics, 15, 39-56.
19. DeShields, O., Kara, A. & Kaynak, E. (1996). Source effects in purchase decisions: The impact of physical attractiveness and accent of salesperson. International Research in Marketing, 13, 89-101.
20. Dickinson, P., & Ellison, J. (1999). Getting connected or staying unplugged: The growing use of computer communication services. Statistics Canada In Services, Science & Technology Division. Analytical paper series 27.
21. Dillman, D., & Frey, J. (1974). Personalization to mail questionnaire response as an element of a previously tested method. Journal of Applied Psychology, 59, 297-301.
22. Dion, K., Berscheid, E., & Walster, E. (1972). What's is beautiful is good. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 24, 285-290.
23. Dodd, D., & Markwiese, B. (1987). Survey response rate as a function of personalised signature on cover letter. The Journal of Social Psychology, 127, 97-98.
24. Dommeyer, C., & Moriarty, E. (1999). Comparing two forms of an email survey: Embedded vs. attached. International Journal of Market Research, 42, 39-50.
25. Eagly, A., Ashmore, R., Makhijani, M., & Longo, L. (1991). What is beautiful is good, but...: A meta-analytic review of research on the physical attractiveness stereotype. Psychological Bulletin, 110, 109-128.
26. Feingold, A. (1992). Good-looking people are not what we think. Psychological Bulletin, 111, 304-341.
27. Freedman, J., & Fraser, S. (1966). Compliance without pressure: The foot-in-the-door technique. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 4, 195-202.
28. Gaertner, S., & Bickman, L. (1971). Effects of race on the elicitation of helping behavior: The wrong number technique. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 20, 218-222.
29. Galan, J.-P., & Vernette, E. (2000). Vers une 4ème génération : les études de marché « on-line ». Décisions Marketing, 19, 39-52.
30. Goodman, M., & Gareis, K. (1993). The influence of status on decision to help. The Journal of Social Psychology, 133, 23-31.
31. Gore, K., Tobiasen, M., & Kayson, W. (1997). Effects of sex of caller, implied sexual orientation of caller, and urgency on altruistic response using the wrong number technique. Psychological Reports, 80, 927-930.
32. Guéguen, N. (2000). Attrait physique de la cible et échanges sur réseaux : une simulation dans le cas d'une prestation de service. 3e Congrès international de psychologie sociale en langue française. Valence, 21-23 septembre 2000.
33. Guéguen, N. (2002). Foot-in-the-door and computer-mediated communication. Computers in Human Behavior, 18, 11-15.
34. Guéguen, N., Fisher-Lokou, J., & Lépy, N. (sous presse). Le « sexe » de l'ordinateur et son effet sur l'évaluation : le rôle du genre d'une interface vocale sur l'évaluation des qualités interactives d'un logiciel. No spécial de la Revue d'interaction homme-machine : psychologie de l'interaction homme-machine.
35. Guéguen, N., & Jacob, C. (sous presse). Fund raising on the Web: The effect of an electronic door-in-the-face technique on compliance to a request. Journal of Online Behavior.
36. Guéguen, N., Pichot, N., & Le Dreff, G. (Resoumis). Similarity and helping behavior on the Web: The impact of the convergence of surnames between a solicitor and a solicitee in a request made by email. Journal of Applied Social Psychology.
37. Harrel, A. (1978). Physical attractiveness, self-disclosure and helping behavior. The Journal of Social Psychology, 104, 15-17.
38. Harris, M., & Klingbeil, D. (1976). The effects of ethnicity of subject and accent and dependancy of confederate on aggressiveness and altruism. The Journal of Social Psychology, 98, 47-53.
39. Joinson, A. (1999). Social desirability, anonymity and internet-based questionnaires. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments & Computers, 31, 433-438.
40. Joule, R.-V., & Beauvois, J.-L. (1998). La soumission librement consentie. Paris: P.U.F.
41. Joule, R.-V., Gouilloux, F., & Weber, F. (1989). The Lure: A new compliance procedure. The Journal of Social Psychology, 129, 741-749.
42. Juni, S., & Roth, M. (1981). Sexism and handicapism in interpersonal helping. The Journal of Social Psychology, 115, 175-181.
43. Kent, R., & Lee, M. (1999). Using Internet for market research: A study of private trading on the Internet. Journal of the Market Research Society, 41, 377-385.
44. Kiesler, S., Sproull, L., & Waters, L. (1996). A prisonner's dilemma experiment on cooperation with people and human-like computers. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 70, 47-65.
45. Lautenschlager, G., & Flaherty, V. (1990). Computer administration of questions: More desirable or more social desirability. Journal of Applied Psychology, 75, 310-314.
46. Markey, P. (2000). Bystander intervention in computer-mediated communication. Computers in Human Behavior, 16, 183-188.
47. Martin, C., & Nagao, D. (1989). Some effects of computerized interviewing on job applicant responses. Journal of Applied Psychology, 74, 72-80.
48. Mavis, B., & Brocato, J. (1998). Postal surveys versus electronic surveys: The tortoise and the hare revisited. Evaluation & the Health Professions, 21, 395-408.
49. McElroy, J., & Morrow, P. (1994). Personal space, personal appearance, and personal selling. Psychological Reports, 74, 425-426.
50. Mehta, R., & Sivadas, E. (1995). Comparing response rates and response content in mail versus electronic mail surveys. Journal of the Market Research Society, 37, 429-439.
51. Miller, R., Seligman, C., Clark, N., & Bush, M. (1976). Perceptual contrast versus reciprocal concession as mediators of induced compliance. Canadian Journal of Behavioural Science, 8, 401-409.
52. Moon, Y. (1998). Impression management in computer-based interviews: The effects of input modality, output modality, and distance. Public Opinion Quaterly, 62, 610-622.
53. Nadler, A., Shapira, R., & Ben-Itzhar, S. (1982). Good looks may help: Effects of helper's physical attractiveness and sex of helper on males' and females' help seeking behavior. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 41, 90-99.
54. Nass, C., Moon, Y. & Green, N. (1997). Are machines gender neutral? Gender-stereotypic responses to computers with voices. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 27, 864-876.
55. Pealer, L., & Weiler, R. (2000). Web-based health survey research: A primer. American Journal of Health Behavior, 24, 69-72.
56. Reeves, R., Baker, G., Boyd, J., & Cialdini, R. (1991). The door-in-the-face technique: Reciprocal concessions versus self-presentational explanations. Journal of Social Behavior and Personality, 6, 545-558.
57. Richman, W., Kiesler, S., Weisband, S., & Dragow, F. (1999). A meta-analytic study of social desirability distortion in computer-administered questionnaires, traditional questionnaires, and interviews. Journal of Applied Psychology, 84, 754-775.
58. Sands, D., Safran, C., Slack, W., & Bleich, H. (1993). Use of electronic mail in a teaching hospital. Proceedings of the Annual symposium on computer applications in medical care (pp. 306-310). American Medicals Informatics Association.
59. Schaefer, D., & Dillman, D. (1998). Development of a standard email methodology: Results of an experiment. Public Opinion Quarterly, 62, 378-397.
60. Shanab, M., & O'Neill, P. (1979). The effects of contrast upon compliance with socially indesirable requests in the door-in-the-face paradigm. Canadian Journal of Behavioural Science, 11, 236-244.
61. Sheehan, K., & McMillan, S. (1999). Response variation in email surveys: An exploration. Journal of Advertising Research, July-August, 45-54.
62. Sinha, A., & Jain, A. (1986). The effects of benefactor and beneficiary characteristics on helping behavior. The Journal of Social Psychology, 126, 361-368.
63. Snyder, M., Decker-Tanke, E., & Berscheid, E. (1977). Social perception and interpersonal behavior: On the self-fulfilling nature of social stereotypes. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 35, 656-666.
64. Sproull, L. (1986). Using electronic mail for data collection in organizational research. Academy of Management Journal, 29, 159-169.
65. Suedfeld, P., Bochner, S., & Matas, C. (1971). Petitionner's attire and petition signing by peace demonstrators: A field experiment on reference group similarity. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 1, 278-283.
66. Tach, L. (1995). Using electronic mail to conduct survey research. Educational Technology, 6, 27-31.
67. Tse, A. (1998). Comparing the response rate, response speed, and response quality of two methods of sending questionnaires: Email versus mail. Journal of the Market Research Society, 40, 353-361.
68. Watt, J. (1999). Using the Internet for quantitative survey research. Quirk's Marketing Research Review. June, 7-8.
69. Wegner, D., & Crano, W. (1975). Racial factors in helping behavior: An unobstrusive field experiment. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 32, 901-905.
70. Weible, R., & Wallace, J. (1998). The impact of the Internet on data collection. Marketing Research, 10, 19-27.
71. Zhang, Y. (2000). Using Internet for survey research: A case study. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 51, 57-68.