The Effect of Invitation Design on Web Survey Response Rates

Social Science Computer Review

Volumn 30, Issue 3, 2012, Pages 339-349

  Kaplowitz, Michael D ^a   Lupi, Frank ^a   Couper, Mick P ^b   Thorp, Laurie ^a  

^a MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN   (United States)

Author keywords

e mail invitations; Internet survey; mail invitations; response rate; survey invitation; survey recruitment

Indexed keywords

EID: 84863471992     PISSN: 08944393     EISSN: 15528286     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/0894439311419084     Document Type: Article

References (29)

1. American Association for Public Opinion Research. (2009). Standard definitions: Final dispositions of case codes and outcome rates for surveys. Retrieved fromhttp://www.aapor.org/ethics/stddef.html#mail.
2. Bosnjak M.,Neubarth W.,Couper M.P.,Bandilla W.,Kaczmirek L.Prenotification in web-based access panel surveys: The influence of mobile text messaging versus E-mail on response rates and sample composition.Social Science Computer Review. 2008;26:213-223.
3. Cook C.,Heath F.,Thompson R.L.A meta-analysis of response rates in web- or Internet-based surveys.Educational and Psychological Measurement. 2000;60:821-826.
4. Couper M.P.Designing effective web surveys. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press; 2008:.
5. Crawford S.D.,Couper M.P.,Lamias M.Web surveys: Perceptions of burden.Social Science Computer Review. 2001;19:146-162.
6. Crawford S.D.,McCabe S.E.,Saltz B.,Boyd C.J.,Freisthler B.,Paschall M.J. Gaining respondent cooperation in college web-based alcohol surveys: Findings from experiments at two universities. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Association for Public Opinion Research; 2004Phoenix, AZ; 2004.
7. De Leeuw E.D.,Callegaro M.,Hox J.J.,Korendijk E.,Lensvelt-Mulders G.The influence of advance letters on response in telephone surveys: A meta-analysis.Public Opinion Quarterly. 2007;71:1-31.
8. Dillman D.A.Mail and Internet surveys: The tailored design method. 2007). Mail and Internet surveys: The tailored design method. (2nd ed.). New York, NY: John Wiley.New York, NY: John Wiley; 2007:.
9. Dillman D.A.,Clark J.R.,Sinclair M.A.How prenotice letters, stamped return envelopes, and reminder postcards affect mailback response rates for census questionnaires.Survey Methodology. 1995;21:1-7.
10. Dillman D.A.,Smyth J.D.,Christian L.M.Internet, mail, and mixed-mode surveys: The tailored design method. New York, NY: Wiley; 2009:.
11. Edwards P.,Roberts I.,Clarke M.,DiGuiseppi C.,Pratap S.,Wentz R.,Kwan I.Increasing response rates to postal questionnaires: Systematic review.British Medical Journal. 2002;324:1183-1185.
12. Guéguen N.,Jacob C.Social presence reinforcement and computer mediated communication: The effect of the photography of a solicitor on compliance to a survey request made by e-mail.CyberPsychology and Behavior. 2002a;5:139-142.
13. Guéguen N.,Jacob C.Solicitation by e-mail and solicitor's status: A field study of social influence on the web.CyberPsychology & Behavior. 2002b;5:377-383.
14. Guéguen N.,Jacob C.,Morineau T.What is in a name? An effect of similarity in computer-mediated communication.E-Journal of Applied Psychology. 2010;6:1-4.
15. Harmon M.A.,Westin E.C.,Levin K.Y. Does type of pre-notification affect web survey response rates?. Paper presented at the annual conference of the American Association for Public Opinion Research; 2005Miami Beach, FL; 2005.
16. Heerwegh D.,Loosveldt G.Web surveys: The effect of controlling survey access using PIN numbers.Social Science Computer Review. 2002;20:10-21.
17. Heerwegh D.,Loosveldt G.An evaluation of the semiautomatic login procedure to control web survey access.Social Science Computer Review. 2003;21:223-234.
18. Hembroff L.A.,Rusz D.,Rafferty A.,McGee H.,Ehrlich N.The cost-effectiveness of alternative advance mailings in a telephone survey.Public Opinion Quarterly. 2005;69:232-245.
19. Joinson A.N.,Reips U.D.Personalized salutation, power of sender and response rates to web-based surveys.Computers in Human Behavior. 2007;23:1372-1383.
20. Joinson A.N.,Woodley A.,Reips U.D.Personalization, authentication and self-disclosure in self-administered internet surveys.Computers in Human Behavior. 2007;23:275-285.
21. Kaplowitz M.D.,Hadlock T.D.,Levine R.A comparison of web and mail survey response rates.Public Opinion Quarterly. 2004;68:94-101.
22. Kaplowitz M.D.,Lupi F.,Hoehn J.Methods for testing and evaluating survey questionnaire. Pressor S.Rothgeb J.M.Couper M.P.Lessler J.T.Martin E.Martin J.Singer E., ed. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley; 2004:503-524.
23. Kaplowitz M.D.,Yeboah F.K.,Thorp L.,Wilson A.Garnering input for recycling communication strategies at a big ten university.Resources Conservation and Recycling. 2009;53:612-623.
24. Klofstad C.A.,Boulianne S.,Basson D.Matching the message to the medium: Results from an experiment on internet survey email contacts.Social Science Computer Review. 2008;26:498-509.
25. Marcus B.,Bosnjak M.,Lindner S.,Pilischenko S.,Schutz A.Compensating for low topic interest and long surveys-A field experiment on nonresponse in web surveys.Social Science Computer Review. 2007;25:372-383.
26. Nielsen J.Designing web usability: The practice of simplicity. Indianapolis, IN: New Riders; 2000:.
27. Porter S.R.,Whitcomb M.E.E-mail subject lines and their effect on web survey viewing and response.Social Science Computer Review. 2005;23:380-387.
28. Porter S.R.,Whitcomb M.E.Mixed-mode contacts in web surveys: Paper is not necessarily better.Public Opinion Quarterly. 2007;71:635-648.
29. Trouteaud A.R.How you ask counts: A test of internet-related components of response rates to a web-based survey.Social Science Computer Review. 2004;22:385-392.