The Impact of Contact Type on Web Survey Response Rates

2003 ◽  
Vol 67 (4) ◽  
pp. 579-588 ◽  
Author(s):  
Stephen R. Porter ◽  
Michael E. Whitcomb
2016 ◽  
Vol 9 (1) ◽  
pp. 1-10 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jared Coopersmith ◽  
Lisa Klein Vogel ◽  
Timothy Bruursema ◽  
Kathleen Feeney

1993 ◽  
Vol 15 (4) ◽  
pp. 321-327 ◽  
Author(s):  
Richard Gitelson ◽  
Deborah Kerstetter ◽  
Frank Guadagnolo

Field Methods ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 31 (4) ◽  
pp. 295-308 ◽  
Author(s):  
Philip S. Brenner

In today’s survey climate, many individuals doubt the legitimacy of survey invitations. Phishing, an Internet-based fraud that tricks users into disclosing private information, has the potential to further erode the perceived legitimacy of e-mailed survey invitations and harm cooperation. However, no study has tested the effect of phishing on response rates. This article reports on a natural experiment examining phishing’s effect on survey response. University faculty and staff received an invitation to participate in an annual web survey on satisfaction with information technology (IT) services followed by a request to participate in a second “survey” ostensibly sent by another university department. However, the second survey invitation was a simulated phishing attack sent by the IT department. Analysis of response rates and the timing of responses from each of the last five years of the legitimate survey suggests that the phishing simulation dramatically reduced response compared to predictions based on previous years.


2011 ◽  
Vol 30 (3) ◽  
pp. 339-349 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michael D. Kaplowitz ◽  
Frank Lupi ◽  
Mick P. Couper ◽  
Laurie Thorp

2018 ◽  
Vol 9 (1) ◽  
pp. 16
Author(s):  
Colleen M Lewellyan ◽  
Allison C Bouwma ◽  
Lisa A Salvati ◽  
David R Bright ◽  
Minji Sohn

Objective: To identify wellness-related needs and assess the impact of wellness-related offerings among first professional year pharmacy students. Innovation: A survey tool was developed and offered to P1 students at the beginning and end of their fall and spring semesters. Additional biometric data was also collected to help identify wellness needs. Data from the first academic year (AY1) was used to develop targeted wellness interventions offered to P1 students during the subsequent academic year (AY2). Assessment strategies from AY1 were repeated with minor modifications in AY2 to identify changes in baseline needs and changes in markers across the academic year. Critical Analysis: AY1 survey response rates varied from 20.1% to 47.4% across the semester. Frequent dissatisfaction was reported with diet, weight, and exercise. AY2 survey response rates varied from 15.8% to 58.3% across the semester. The AY2 cohort demonstrated similar dissatisfaction data; however, also demonstrated lower baseline stress scores as compared to the AY1 cohort, higher baseline BMI, and higher systolic and diastolic blood pressure. Individual interventions offered to AY2 students were attended by as many as 16.5% of the academic cohort. Nutrition classes exhibited stronger attendance than fitness classes. Next Steps: The process used in this study was easily implemented and provided understanding of wellness gaps, which helped to identify interventions that were implemented and assessed. The process also demonstrated that wellness needs can vary from one population to another, reinforcing the value of periodic assessment to identify changing needs.   Type: Note


1979 ◽  
Vol 16 (3) ◽  
pp. 429-431 ◽  
Author(s):  
Terry L. Childers ◽  
O. C. Ferrell

A 2 × 2 factorial experiment was designed to test the impact on mail survey response rate resulting from variations in paper trim size and number of printed pages in the questionnaire. ANOVA findings suggest 8½ × 11″ paper trim size produces a better response rate than an 8½ × 14″ paper trim size. Use of a one-sheet (front and back) versus a two-sheet (front only) questionnaire did not cause a significant difference in response rate; a hypothesized interaction effect was not found to be statistically significant.


2010 ◽  
Vol 46 (1p1) ◽  
pp. 232-242 ◽  
Author(s):  
Katherine M. James ◽  
Jeanette Y. Ziegenfuss ◽  
Jon C. Tilburt ◽  
Ann M. Harris ◽  
Timothy J. Beebe

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document