UNDERSTANDING MAIL SURVEY RESPONSE BEHAVIOR

By A. Meta-analysis, Francis J. Yammarino, S. Skinner, Terry L. Childers. 2004

142 citations recorded by the source corpus.

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

Compensating for Low Topic Interest and Long Surveys (2007, background): “…factors known to increase response rates in mail surveys are an interesting (or salient) topic of the survey, the number of contacts, and the use of monetary incentives (cash) prior to participation (see Church, 1993; Edwards et al.; and the meta-analyses summarized in Yammarino et al., 1991).”
Response Rates in Organizational Science, 1995–2008: A Meta-analytic Review and Guidelines for Survey Researchers (2010, methodology): “Some previous studies (Yammarino et al. 1991; Yu and Cooper 1983) reported a significant positive relationship between followup and response rates, whereas others found non-significant (Roth and BeVier 1998) or negative relationships (Baruch and Holtom 2008).”
Techniques for improving response rates in OM survey research (2002, methodology): “With the Type I risk (α) set at a conservative 0.01 and Type II risk (β) set at 0.05, we had to call 83 companies (n) with a critical value (c) of 3.”
Response Rate and Response Quality of Internet-Based Surveys: An Experimental Study (2004, methodology): “In terms of mail surveys, the length of the questionnaire has been repeatedly investigated (Dillman, 2000; Fox et al., 1988; Heberlein and Baumgartner, 1978; Kanuk and Berenson, 1975; Yammarino et al., 1991; Yu and Cooper, 1983).”