The technical potential of the Internet offers survey researchers a wide range of possibilities for web surveys in terms of questionnaire design; however, the abuse of technical facilities can detract respondents from cooperating rather than motivating them. Within the web survey methodology literature, many contributions can be found on how to write a ‘‘good’’ questionnaire. The outcomes are however scattered and researchers and practitioners may find it difficult to obtain an overall picture. The article reviews the latest empirical research on how questionnaire characteristics affect response rates. The article is divided into three main sections: an introduction where the various forms of nonresponse in web surveys are described; a second section presenting questionnaire features affecting nonresponse— general structure, length, disclosure of survey progress, visual presentation, interactivity, and question/response format—and a final section that summarizes the options in terms of questionnaire design and its implications for nonresponse rate.
Conrad, F., Couper, M., Tourangeau, T., & Galesic, M. ( 2005). Interactive feedback can improve quality of responses in web surveys. Paper presented at the 60th American Association for Public Opinion Research Annual Conference, Phoenix, AZ.
3.
Conrad, F., Couper, M., Tourangeau, T., & Peytchev, A. ( 2006). Use and non-use of clarification features in web surveys . Journal of Official Statistics, 22, 245-269.
4.
Cook, C., Heath, F., & Thompson, R.L. (2000). A meta-analysis of response rates in web- or Internet-based surveys. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 60, 821-836.
5.
Couper, M. ( 2000). Web surveys: A review of issues and approaches. Public Opinion Quarterly, 64, 464-494.
6.
Couper, M. ( 2001). Web surveys: The questionnaire design challenge. Proceedings of the 53rd Session of the International Statistical Institute, Seoul, Korea.
7.
Couper, M., Tourangeau, R., Conrad, F., & Singer, E. ( 2006). Evaluating the effectiveness of visual analog scales: A web experiment. Social Science Computer Review, 24, 227-245.
8.
Couper, M., Tourangeau, R., & Kenyon, K. ( 2004). Picture this! Exploring visual effects in web surveys . Public Opinion Quarterly, 68, 255-266.
9.
Couper, M., Traugott, M., & Lamias, M. ( 2001). Web survey design and administration. Public Opinion Quarterly, 65, 230-253.
10.
Crawford, S., Couper, M., & Lamias, M. ( 2001). Web surveys: Perceptions of burden. Social Science Computer Review, 19, 146-162.
11.
DeRouvray, C., & Couper, M. ( 2002). Designing a strategy for reducing ‘‘no opinion’’ responses in web-based surveys. Social Science Computer Review , 20, 3-9.
12.
Deutskens, E., Ruyter, K., Wetzels, M., & Oosterveld, P. (2004). Response rate and response quality of Internet-based surveys: An experimental study. Marketing Letters, 15, 21-36.
13.
Dillman, D., Sinclair, M., & Clark, J. ( 1993). Effects of questionnaire length, respondent-friendly design, and a difficult question on response rates for occupant-addressed census mail surveys. Public Opinion Quarterly, 57, 289-304.
14.
Dillman, D., Tortora, R., Conradt, J., & Bowker, D. ( 1998). Influence of the plain vs fancy design on response rates for web surveys. Proceedings of the Survey Research Methods Section, American Statistical Association.
15.
Dommeyer, C., & Moriarty, E. ( 2000). Comparing two forms of an e-mail survey: Embedded vs. attached. Journal of the Market Research Society, 42, 39-53.
16.
European Commission. (2008). Eurobarometer 293, European Commission, Brussels.
17.
Galesic, M. ( 2005). Effects of questionnaire length on quality of responses in web surveys. Paper presented at the ESF Workshop , Dubrovnik, Croatia.
18.
Galesic, M. ( 2006). Dropouts on the web: Effects of interest and burden experienced during an online survey. Journal of Official Statistics, 22, 313-328.
19.
Ganassali, S. ( 2008). The influence of the design of web survey questionnaires on the quality of responses. Survey Research Methods, 2, 21-32.
20.
Groves, R., Fowler, F., Jr., Couper, M., Lepkowski, J., Singer, E., & Tourangeau, R. (2004). Survey methodology. New York: John Wiley and Sons.
21.
Haraldsen, G., Stalnacke, M., & Blackwell, K. ( 1999). Empirical contributions to a general survey response model. Paper presented at the International Conference on Survey Nonresponse, Portland, OR.
22.
Healey, B. ( 2007). Drop down and scroll mice: The effect of response option format and input mechanism employed on data quality in web surveys. Social Science Computer Review, 25, 111-128.
23.
Heberlein, T., & Baumgartner, R. (1975). Factors affecting response rates to mailed questionnaires: A quantitative analysis of the published literature . American Sociological Review, 43, 447-462.
24.
Hogg, A., & Miller, J. ( 2003). Watch out for dropouts. Quirk’s Marketing Research Review, 1137. Retrieved from http://www.websm.org/uploadi/editor/Watch%20out%20for%20dropouts.doc . Retrieved date 19th March 2010.
25.
Hudson, D., Seah, L.H., Hite, D., & Haab, T. ( 2004). Telephone presurveys, self-selection and non-response bias to mail and Internet surveys in economic research. Applied Economic Letters, 11, 237-240.
26.
Jackob, N., & Zerback, T. ( 2006). Improving quality by lowering non-response: A guideline for online surveys. Paper presented at the WAPOR Seminar ‘‘Quality Criteria in Survey Research VI,’’Cadenabbia, Italy.
27.
Jansen, J. ( 1985). Effect of questionnaire layout and size and issue-involvement on response rates in mail surveys. Perceptual and Motor Skills , 61, 139-142.
28.
Lozar Manfreda, K., Batagelj, Z., & Vehovar, V. ( 2002). Design of web survey questionnaires: Three basic experiments . Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 7, 3. Retrieved from http://www.websm.org/uploadi/editor/Lozar_2002_Design.doc . Retrieved date 19th March 2010.
29.
Lozar Manfreda, K., Berzelak, J., Vehovar, V., Bosnjak, M., & Haas, I. ( 2008). Web surveys versus other survey modes: A meta-analysis comparing response rates. International Journal of Market Research, 50, 79-104.
30.
Lozar Manfreda, K., Bosnjak, M., Haas, I., & Vehovar, V. ( 2005). Web survey response rates compared to other modes-A meta analysis. Paper presented at the 60th American Association for Public Opinion Research Annual Conference, Miami Beach, FL.
31.
Lozar Manfreda, K., & Vehovar, V. ( 2002). Survey design features influencing response rates in web surveys. Paper presented at the International Conference on Improving Surveys, Copenhagen, Denmark.
32.
Peytchev, A., Couper, M., McCabe, S., & Crawford, S. ( 2006). Web survey design: Paging versus scrolling. Public Opinion Quarterly, 70, 596-607.
33.
Redline, C., & Dillman, D. ( 1999). The influence of auxiliary, symbolic, numeric and verbal language on navigational compliance in self-administered questionnaires. U.S. Census Bureau. Retrieved from http://survey.sesrc.wsu.edu/dillman/papers/Auxiliary,Symbolic,Numeric% 20paper--with%20Cleo.pdf. Retrieved date 19th March 2010.
34.
Stieger, S., Reips, U.-D., & Voracek, M. ( 2007). Forced-response in online surveys: Bias from reactance and an increase in sex-specific dropout. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 58, 1653-1660.
35.
Tourangeau, R., Couper, M., Galesic, M., & Givens, J. ( 2004). A comparison of two web-based surveys: Static versus dynamic versions of the NAMCS questionnaire. RC33 6th International Conference on Social Science Methodology: Recent Developments and Applications in Social Research Methodology, Amsterdam , Holland.
36.
Umbach, P. ( 2004). Web surveys: Best practices. New Directions for Institutional Research, 121, 23-38.
37.
Yammarino, F., Skinner, S., & Childers, T. ( 1991). Understanding mail survey response behavior: A meta-analysis . Public Opinion Quarterly, 55, 613-639.
38.
Yu, J., & Cooper, H. ( 1983). A Quantitative review of research design effects on response rates to questionnaires. Journal of Marketing Research, 20, 36-44.
