Factors conditioning the return rate of mailed questionnaires in the light of experimental studies
Abstract
The basic task of the experimental studies related in the article was to learn about the specificity of the Polish population as far as response of potential respondents is concerned to marketing research conducted with the use of the method of postal survey. To this end significance of effect of 15 variables on the return rate of the questionnaires was checked. The variables were distinguished on the basis of analysis of the relevant literature as well as of study results and Polish university teachers' experiences. A900 person random sample was drawn with the help of acomputer algorithm that was representative of the whole of adult Lublin residents with respect to age and sex. The whole drawn sample was divided into 16 experimental groups, each group numbering 50 subjects, and one control numbering 100 subjects. Each of the distinguished groups represented a different variable that was studied.
The study results show that enclosing an envelope for the reply, reminding of the reply, enclosing a greater sum of money with the questionnaire, and a higher education and older age of the possible respondents had a positive effect on the percentage of returned questionnaires. The percentage was decreased when the envelopes containing the questionnaires were franked, the volume of the questionnaires was bigger, the survey was under the auspices of a private study centre, the subject was prenotified about his participation in the survey and when too small a sum of money was offered for the participation (50 gr). However, such variables as the subject of the survey, anonymity of the respondents, a repeated dispatch of the questionnaires, lottery and the sex of the respondents did not have a significant effect on the degree of return in the light of the obtained results. If anonymity was not guaranteed, or respondents were offered taking part in the study in return for filling in the questionnaire, and in the case of female respondents we can only talk about tendencies to decrease the return rate.
References
Altschuld J.W., Thomas P.M., McColskey W.H., Smith D.W. i in. (1992), Mailed evaluation questionnaires: Replications of a96 percent return rate procedure, „Evaluation and Program Planning”, 3, s.239-246.
Armstrong J.S., Lusk E.J.(1987), Return postage in mail surveys: A meta-analysis, „Public Opinion Quarterly”, 51, s.233-248.
Bajka Z.(1996), Polacy a reklama, „Aida Media”, 4, s.40-43.
Biner P.M., Barton D.L.(1990), Justifying the enclosure of monetary incentives in mail survey cover letters, „Psychology and Marketing”, 3, s.153-162.
Breen G.E.(1995), Badania marketingowe w twojej firmie, PWE, Warszawa.
Brzeziński J.(1996), Metodologia badań psychologicznych, PWN, Warszawa.
Chołoniewski J.(1994), Pocztowe badania ankietowe przeprowadzane przez firmę „Estymator”, „Marketing i Rynek”, 2, s.27-29.
Chołoniewski J.(1996), Badania w kopercie, „Marketing Polska”, 9, s.11.
Daniłowicz P., Sztabiński F.(1992), Nowe spojrzenie na ankietę pocztową. Jak uzyskano 70% zwrotów, w: Analizy i próby technik badawczych w socjologii. Problemy humanizacji procesu badawczego, red. Z. Gostkowski, t.VIII, s.122-141, Instytut Filozofii i Socjologii PAN, Warszawa.
Dillman D.A.(1978), Mail and telephone surveys: The total design method, Wiley, New York.
Dillman D.A.(1991), The design and administration of mail surveys, „Annual Review of Sociology”, 17, s.225-249.
Dillman D.A.(1995), Why Most Mail Surveys Should Use Token Financial Icentives. Comments prepared for round table luncheon discussion Wednesday, August 16, 1995, Joint Statistical Meetings, Orlando, Florida.
Dillman D.A., West K.K., Clark J.R.(1994), Influence of an invitation to answer by telephone on response to census questionnaires, „Public Opinion Quarterly”, 58, s.557-568.
Erdos P.L., Regier J.(1977), Visible vs. disguised keying on questionnaires, „Journal of Advertising Research”, 1, s.13-18.
Etzel M.J., Walker B.J.(1974), Effects of alternative follow-up procedures on mail survey response rates, „Journal of Applied Psychology”, 2, s.219-221.
FoxR.J., Crask M.R., KimJ.(1988), Mail survey response rate: A meta-analysis of selected techniques for inducing response, „Public Opinion Quarterly”, 4, s.467-491.
Fraisse P.(1991), Metoda eksperymentalna, w: Zarys psychologii eksperymentalnej, red. P.Fraisse iJ.Piaget, PWN, Warszawa, s.87-134.
Golden L.L., Anderson W.T., Sharpe L.K.(1980), The effects of salutation, monetary incentive, and degree of urbanization on mail questionnaire response rate, speed, and quality, w: Advances in Consumer Research, red. K.B.Monroe, Association for Consumer Research, Ann Arbor.
Gorbaniuk O.(1997), Niektóre uwarunkowania stopnia zwrotu, jakości i szybkości zwrotu ankiet pocztowych na przykładzie badań marketingowych na Ukrainie (niepublikowana praca magisterska), Lublin.
Gorbaniuk O.(1999), Stopień zwrotu ankiet pocztowych w badaniach marketingowych w świetle doświadczeń nauczycieli akademickich polskich uczelni, „Roczniki Nauk Społecznych”, 27, z.1, s.167-181.
Goyder J.(1982), Further evidence on factors affecting response rates to mailed questionnaires, „American Sociological Review”, 4, s.550-553.
Goyder J.(1985), Face-to-face interviews and mailed questionnaires: The net difference in response rate, „Public Opinion Quarterly”, 2, s.234-252.
Goyder J., Lock J., McNair T.(1992), Urbanization effects on survey nonresponse: atest within and across cities, „Quality and Quantity”, 26, s.39-48.
Green K.E.(1996), Sociodemographic factors and mail survey response, „Psychology and Marketing”, 2, s.171-184.
Hackler J.C., Bourgette P.(1973), Dollars, dissonance, and survey returns, „Public Opinion Quarterly”, 2, s.276-281.
Heberlein T.A., Baumgartner R.(1978), Factors affecting response rates to mailed questionnaires: Aquantitative analysis of the published literature, „American Sociological Review”, 4, s.447-462.
Heberlein T.A., Baumgartner R.(1981), Is aquestionnaire necessary in asecond mailing?, „Public Opinion Quarterly”, 1, s.102-108.
Hopkins K.D., Gullickson A.R.(1992), Response rates in survey research: Ameta-analysis of the effects of monetary gratuities, „Journal of Experimental Education”, 1, s.52-62.
Kahle L.R., Sales B.D.(1978), Personalization of the outside envelope in mail surveys, „Public Opinion Quarterly”, 4, s.547-550.
Kahler H.D., Kessel D., Schonbach P., Stuwe W.(1973), Influences of the designation „Guest-Worker” and „Foreign-Worker” on response rate and intentions to benefit foreign workers, „Zeitschrift für Sozialpsychologie”, 4, s.351-360.
Kaldenberg D.O., Koenig H.F., Becker B.W.(1994), Mail survey response rate patterns in apopulation of the elderly: Does response deteriorate with age? „Public Opinion Quarterly”, 1, s.68-76.
Kall J.(1995), Reklama, PWE, Warszawa.
Kwarciak B.(1997), Co trzeba wiedzieć oreklamie, Profesjonalna Szkoła Biznesu, Kraków.
Nederhof A.J.(1982), Effects of preliminary contacts on volunteering in mail surveys, „Perceptual and Motor Skills”, 3, s.1333-1334.
Paolillo J.G., Lorenzi P.(1984), Monetary incentives and mail questionnaire response rates, „Journal of Advertising”, 1, s.46-48.
Pressley M.M., Tullar W.L.(1977), Afactor interactive investigation of mail survey response rates from acommercial population, „Journal of Marketing Research”, 1, s.108-111.
Reykowski J.(1986), Motywacja, postawy prospołeczne aosobowość, PWN, Warszawa.
Rudd N.M., Maxwell N.L.(1980), Mail survey response rates: Effects of questionnaire topic and length and recipients' community, „Psychological Reports”, 2, s.435-440.
Schlegelmilch B.B., Diamantopoulos A.(1991), Prenotification and mail survey response rates: Aquantitative integration of the literature, „Journal of the Market Research Society”, 3, s.243-255.
Słomczyński K.M.(1968), Zastosowanie ankiety pocztowej wpowtórnym kontakcie badawczym, w: Analizy ipróby technik badawczych wsocjologii, red. Z.Gostkowski, J.Lutyński, t.II, Instytut Filozofii iSocjologii PAN, Warszawa, s.239-266.
Stevens R.E.(1975), Does precoding mail questionnaires affect response rates? „Public Opinion Quarterly”, 4, s.621-622.
Sztabiński F.(1981), Proces kontaktowania się wankiecie pocztowej, w: Szkice metodologiczne, red. K.Lutyńska, Instytut Filozofii iSocjologii PAN, Warszawa, s.71-85.
Sztabiński F.(1985), Ankieta pocztowa iwywiad kwestionariuszowy. Wstępne wyniki analizy porównawczej, w: Zmetodologii imetodyki socjologicznych badań terenowych, red. Z.Gostkowski, Instytut Filozofii iSocjologii PAN, Warszawa, s.37-49.
Sztabiński F.(1989), Wywiad kwestionariuszowy iankieta pocztowa. Analiza przebiegu procesów uzyskiwania informacji iich rezultatów, „Przegląd Socjologiczny”, 37, s.235-263.
Sztabiński F.(1997), Ankieta pocztowa iwywiad kwestionariuszowy, Instytut Filozofii iSocjologii PAN, Warszawa.
Sztucki T.(1995), Promocja: sztuka nabywania nabywców, Placet, Warszawa.
Victor C.R.(1988), Some methodological aspects of using postal questionnaires with the elderly, „Archives of Gerontology and Geriatrics”, 2, s.163-172.
Warriner K., Goyder J., Gjersten H. i in.(1996), Charities, No, Lotteries, No, Cash, Yes: Main Effests and Interactions in aCanadian Incentives Experiment. Paper for Presentation at the Session Sociological Methods I: Innovations in Technique, „Ontario June”, 5, s.11.
Woodward J.M., McKelvie S.J.(1985), Effects of topical interest and mode of address on response to mail survey, „Psychological Reports”, 3, s.929-930.
YuJ., Cooper H.(1983), Aquantitative review of research design effects on response rates to questionnaires, „Journal of Marketing Research”, 1, s.36-44.
Copyright (c) 2001 Roczniki Nauk Społecznych
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
