This article reports results of a meta-analysis of survey response rates in published research in counseling and clinical psychology over a 20-year span and describes reported survey administration procedures in those fields. Results of 308 survey administrations showed a weighted average response rate of 49.6%. Among possible moderators, response rates differed only by population sampled, journal in which articles were published, sampling source and method, and use of follow-up. Researchers whose studies were included in this meta-analysis used follow-up but rarely used incentives, prenotification, or other response-facilitation methods to maximize response rates. Although the future of survey research in general may rely more heavily on Internet data collection, mail surveys dominate in this field.
American Association for Public Opinion Research. (2006). Standard definitions: Final dispositions of case codes and outcome rates for surveys (4th ed.). Lenexa, KS: AAPOR.
2.
Baruch, Y. (1999). Response rate in academic studies-A comparative analysis. Human Relations, 52, 421-438.
3.
Borenstein, M., Hedges, L., Higgins, J., & Rothstein, H. (2005). Comprehensive meta-analysis (Version 2) [Computer software]. Englewood, NJ: Biostat .
4.
Boser, J., & Clark, S. (1996, April). Reviewing the research on mail survey response rates: Narrative review. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, New York.
5.
Church, A.H. (1993). Estimating the effect of incentives on mail survey response rates: A meta-analysis. Public Opinion Quarterly , 57, 62-79.
6.
Curtin, R., Presser, S., & Singer, E. (2005). Changes in telephone survey nonresponse over the past quarter century.Public Opinion Quarterly, 69, 87-98.
7.
Dey, E.L. (1997). Working with low survey response rates: The efficacy of weighting adjustments. Research in Higher Education, 38, 215-227.
8.
Dillman, D.A. (1978). Mail and telephone surveys: The Total Design Method . New York: John Wiley.
9.
Dillman, D.A. (2000). Mail and Internet surveys: The Tailored Design Method. New York: John Wiley.
10.
Eysenbach, G., & Wyatt, J. (2002). Using the Internet for surveys and health research . Journal of Medical Internet Research, 4(2). Retrieved February 18, 2007, from http://www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/articlerender.fcgi?artid=1761932
11.
Faught, K.S., Whitten, D., & Green, K.W. (2004, Spring). Doing survey research on the Internet: Yes, timing does matter. Journal of Computer Information Systems , 44, 26-34.
12.
Fisher, C.B. (2003). Adolescent and parent perspectives on ethical issues in youth drug use and suicide survey research. Ethics & Behavior, 13, 303-332.
13.
Fox, R.J., Crask, M.R., & Kim, J. (1988). Mail survey response rate: A meta-analysis of selected techniques for inducing response. Public Opinion Quarterly, 52, 467-491.
14.
Grant, R.W., & Sugarman, J. (2004). Ethics in human subjects research: Do incentives matter? Journal of Medicine and Philosophy, 29, 717-738.
15.
Green, K.E., & Boser, J.A. (2001, April). Trends in postal mail survey response rate through 1999. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Seattle, WA. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 454 237)
16.
Green, K.E., & Hutchinson, S.R. (1996, April). Reviewing the research on mail survey response rates: Meta-analysis. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, New York.
17.
Greer, T.V., Chuchinprakarn, N., & Seshadri, S. (2000). Likelihood of participating in mail survey research . Industrial Marketing Management, 29, 97-109.
18.
Hedges, L.V., & Olkin, I. (1985). Statistical methods for meta-analysis. Orlando: Academic Press.
19.
Hopkins, K.D., & Gullickson, A.R. (1992). Response rates in survey research: A meta-analysis of the effects of monetary gratuities. Journal of Experimental Education, 3, 52-62.
20.
Huang, J.Y., Hubbard, S.M., & Mulvey, K.P. (2003). Obtaining valid response rates: Considerations beyond the Tailored Design Method. Evaluation and Program Planning, 26, 91-97.
21.
Hunter, J.E., & Schmidt, F.L. (2003). Methods of meta-analysis: Correcting error and bias in research findings. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
22.
James, D.C.S., Chen, W.W., & Sheu, J-J. (2005). Comparison of three tobacco survey methods with college students: A case study. International Electronic Journal of Health Education, 8, 120-125.
23.
Jobber, D., & O'Reilly, D. (1998). Industrial mail surveys: A methodological update . Industrial Marketing Management, 27, 95-107.
24.
Kypri, K., Gallagher, S.J., & Cashell-Smith, M.L. (2004). An Internet-based survey method for college student drinking research. Drug and Alcohol Dependence, 76, 45-53.
25.
Larson, P.D., & Poist, R.F. (2004). Improving response rates to mail surveys: A research note. Transportation Journal, 43, 67-74.
26.
Leece, P., Bhandari, M., Sprague, S., Swiontkowski, M.F., Schemitsch, E.H., Tornetta, P., et al. (2004). Internet versus mailed questionnaires: A controlled comparison (2). Journal of Medical Internet Research , 6(4), e39. Retrieved May 2, 2008, from http://www.jmir.org/2004/4/e39/
27.
Lipsey, M.W. (2003). Those confounded moderators in meta-analysis: Good, bad, and ugly. The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 587, 69-81.
Martinussen, M., & Fjukstad, B. (1995). Meta-Dos: A computer program for meta-analysis calculations. Tromsø: University of Tromsø, Norway.
30.
McMahon, S.R., Iwamoto, M., Massoudi, M.S., Yusuf, H.R., Stevenson, J.M., David, F., et al. (2003). Comparison of e-mail, fax, and postal surveys of pediatricians. Pediatrics, 111, 299-303.
31.
Newby, R., Watson, J., & Woodliff, D. (2003). SME survey methodology: Response rates, data quality, and cost effectiveness. Entrepreneurship: Theory and Practice , 28, 163-173.
32.
Porter, S.R., & Umbach, P.D. (2001, June). What works best? Collecting alumni data with multiple technologies. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Association for Institutional Research, Long Beach, CA.
33.
Ritter, P., Lorig, K., Laurent, D., & Matthews, K. (2004). Internet versus mailed questionnaires: A randomized comparison. Journal of Medical Internet Research, 6(3). Retrieved February 18, 2007, from http://www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/articlerender.fcgi?artid=1550608
34.
Rodriguez, H.P., von Glahn, T., Rogers, W.H., Hong, C., Fanjiangand, G., & Safran, D.G. (2006). Evaluating patients' experiences with individual physicians: A randomized trial of mail, Internet, and interactive voice response telephone administration of surveys. Medical Care, 44(2), 167-174.
35.
Scriven, A., & Smith-Ferrier, S. (2003). The application of online surveys for workplace health research. Journal of the Royal Society for the Promotion of Health, 123(2), 95-101.
36.
Singer, E., Groves, R.M., & Corning, A.D. (1999). Differential incentives: Beliefs about practices, perceptions of equity, and effects on survey participation. Public Opinion Quarterly, 63, 251-260.
37.
Weathers, P.L., Furlong, M.J., & Solórzano, D. (1993). Mail survey research in counseling psychology: Current practice and suggested guidelines. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 40(2), 238-244.
38.
Yammarino, F.J., Skinner, S.J., & Childers, T.L. (1991). Understanding mail survey response behavior: A meta-analysis. Public Opinion Quarterly , 55, 613-639.
