A comprehensive literature review of techniques used to increase response rates to questionnaires was conducted. Conclusions were based on arithmetic combination of 497 response rates found in 93 journal articles. Response rates were found to be increased by personal and telephone (versus mail) surveys, either prepaid or promised incentives, nonmonetary premiums and rewards, and increasing amounts of monetary reward. Other facilitators that increased responding were preliminary notification, foot-in-the-door techniques, personalization, and followup letters. Several facilitators were found to be ineffective. An estimated magnitude of effect was calculated for each design variation.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
ArmstrongJ. Scott (1975), “Monetary Incentives in Mail Surveys,”Public Opinion Quarterly, 39, 111–16.
2.
CannellCharles F., and FowlerFloyd J. (1963), “A Comparison of a Self-Enumerative Procedure and a Personal Interview: A Validity Study,”Public Opinion Quarterly, 27, 250–64.
CohenJacob (1977), Statistical Power Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences.New York: Academic Press.
5.
CooperHarris (1979), “Statistically Combining Independent Studies: A Meta-Analysis of Sex Differences in Conformity Research,”Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 37, 131–46.
6.
CooperHarris (1981), “On the Significance of Effects and the Effects of Significance,”Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 41, 1013–8.
7.
CooperHarris (1982), “Scientific Guidelines for Conducting Integrative Research Reviews,”Review of Educational Research, 52(Summer), 291–302.
8.
CooperHarris, and RosenthalR. (1980), “Statistical Versus Traditional Procedures for Summarizing Research Findings,”Psychological Bulletin, 87, 442–9.
9.
GlassG. (1980), “Summarizing Effect Sizes,”New Directions for Methodology of Social and Behavioral Science, 5, 13–31.
10.
KanukLeslie, and BerensonConrad (1975), “Mail Surveys and Response Rates: A Literature Review,”Journal of Marketing Research, 12(November), 440–53.
11.
KishLeslie, and HessIrene (1959), “A ‘Replacement’ Procedure for Reducing the Bias of Nonresponse,”American Statistician, 13, 17–9.
12.
LinskyArnold S. (1975), “Stimulating Responses to Mailed Questionnaires: A Review,”Public Opinion Quarterly, 39, 82–101.
13.
NuckolsR. (1964), “The Validity and Comparability of Mail and Personal Interview Surveys,”Journal of Marketing Research, 1(February), 11–6.
14.
O'DellWilliam F. (1962), “Personal Interviews or Mail Panels?”Journal of Marketing, 26(October), 34–9.
15.
RogersTheresa (1976), “Interviews by Telephone and in Person: Quality of Responses and Field Performance,”Public Opinion Quarterly, 40(Spring), 51–65.
16.
RosenthalR. (1978), “Combining Results of Independent Studies,”Psychological Bulletin, 85, 185–93.
17.
SmithMary Lee (1980), “Publication Bias and Meta-Analysis,”Evaluation in Education, 4, 22–4.
18.
WilliamsB. (1978), A Sampler on Sampling.New York: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
