Comparing response rates in e-mail and paper surveys: A meta-analysis
Tóm tắt
Từ khóa
Tài liệu tham khảo
*Akl, 2005, Electronic mail was not better than postal mail for surveying residents and faculty, Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 58, 425, 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2004.10.006
American Association for Public Opinion Research (2006). Standard Definitions: Final Dispositions of Case Codes and Outcome Rates for Surveys, Ann Arbor, Michigan: Author, http://www.aapor.org/pdfs/standarddefs_4.pdf.
Andersen, 2004, An experimental study of language intensity and response rate in E-mail surveys, Communication Reports, 17, 73, 10.1080/08934210409389377
Armstrong, 1975, Monetary incentives in mail surveys, Public Opinion Quarterly, 39, 111, 10.1086/268203
*Bachmann, 1996, Tracking the progress of e-mail vs. snail mail, Marketing Research, 8, 31
*Bachmann, 2000, E-mail and snail mail face off in rematch, Marketing Research, 11, 10
Berge, 1995, Computer mediated scholarly discussion groups, Computers and Education, 24, 183, 10.1016/0360-1315(95)00010-J
Bickart, 1999, The distribution of survey contact and participation in the United States: Constructing a survey-based estimate, Journal of Marketing Research, 36, 286, 10.2307/3152100
*Boyer, 2002, Print versus electronic surveys: A comparison of two data collection methodologies, Journal of Operations Management, 20, 357, 10.1016/S0272-6963(02)00004-9
Church, 1993, Estimating effect of incentives on mail survey response rates: A meta-analysis, Public Opinion Quarterly, 57, 62, 10.1086/269355
Clausen, 1947, Controlling bias in mail questionnaires, Journal of the American Statistical Association, 42, 497, 10.2307/2280007
Claycomb, 2000, Riding the wave: Response rates and the effects of time intervals between successive mail survey follow-up efforts, Journal of Business Research, 48, 157, 10.1016/S0148-2963(98)00098-8
*Comley, P. (1996). The use of internet as a data collection method. First ESOMAR paper on Internet data collection. Published at ESOMAR/EMAC Symposium, November.
Cook, T. (1999). Considering the major arguments against random assignment: An analysis of the intellectual culture surrounding evaluation in American schools of education. Paper presented at the Conference on Evaluation of Educational Policies, American Academy of Arts and Sciences, Cambridge, Mass.
Cook, 2000, A meta-analysis of response rates in e-mail- or internet-based surveys, Educational and Psychological Measurement, 60, 821, 10.1177/00131640021970934
Couper, 2000, Web surveys: A review of issues and approaches, Public Opinion Quarterly, 64, 464, 10.1086/318641
*Couper, 1999, A comparison of mail and e-mail for a survey of employees in federal statistical agencies, Journal of Official Statistics, 15, 39
Dalecki, 1988, The effects of multi-wave mailings on the external validity of mail surveys, Journal of the Community Development Society, 19, 51, 10.1080/15575338809490015
Dersimonian, 1986, Meta-analysis in clinical trials, Journal of Controlled Clinical Trials, 7, 177, 10.1016/0197-2456(86)90046-2
Dillman, 1974, Increasing mail questionnaire response: A four-state comparison, American Sociological Review, 39, 744, 10.2307/2094318
Dommeyer, 2000, Comparing two forms of an email survey: Embedded vs. attached, International Journal of Market Research, 42, 39, 10.1177/147078530004200103
Donald, 1960, Implications for nonresponse for the interpretation of mail questionnaire data, Public Opinion Quarterly, 24, 99, 10.1086/266934
*Donohue, 2000, A multi-method evaluation of journals in the decision and management sciences by US academics, Omega-International Journal of Management Science, 28, 17, 10.1016/S0305-0483(99)00024-9
Enticott, G. (2002). Using electronic research methodologies in policy research. CLRGR paper no. 9.
Fox, 1988, Mail survey rate-a meta-analysis of selected techniques for inducing response, Public Opinion Quarterly, 52, 467, 10.1086/269125
Fraker, 1987, Evaluating comparison group designs with employment related programs, Journal of Human Resources, 22, 194, 10.2307/145902
*Fraze, S., Hardin, K., Brashears, T., Smith, J., & Lockaby, J. (2002). The effects of delivery mode upon survey response rate and perceived attitudes of Texas agri-science teachers. Paper presented at the National Agricultural Education Research Conference, December 11–13, Las Vegas, NV.
Glass, 1977, Integrating findings: The meta-analysis of research, Review of Research in Education, 5, 351
Göritz, 2006, Incentives in web studies: Methodological issues and a review, International Journal of Internet Science, 1, 58
Groves, 2002
Groves, 1988, An overview of nonresponse issues in telephone surveys
*Harewood, 2001, Prospective comparison of endoscopy patient satisfaction surveys: E-mail versus standard mail versus telephone, The American Journal of Gastroenterology, 96, 3312, 10.1111/j.1572-0241.2001.05331.x
Hindman, 2000, The rural-urban digital divide, Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly, 77, 549, 10.1177/107769900007700306
Hoffman, 1997, A new paradigm for electronic commerce, The Information Society, 13, 43, 10.1080/019722497129278
*Hollowell, 2000, Internet and postal survey of endourologic practice patterns among American urologists, Journal of Urology, 163, 1779, 10.1016/S0022-5347(05)67541-6
Hox, 1994, A comparison of nonresponse in mail, telephone, and face-to-face surveys-applying multilevel modeling to meta-analysis, Quality and Quantity, 28, 329, 10.1007/BF01097014
Huff, 1993, Macpsych: An electronic discussion list and archive for psychology concerning the Macintosh computer, Behaviour Research Methods, Instruments and Computers, 25, 60, 10.3758/BF03204451
Hunter, 1990
Ilieva, 2002, Online surveys in marketing research: Pros and cons, International Journal of Marketing Research, 44, 361
James, 1992, Large monetary incentives and their effect on mail survey response rates, Public Opinion Quarterly, 56, 442, 10.1086/269336
*Jones, 1999, Health surveys in the workplace: Comparison of postal, email and World Wide Web methods, Occupational Medicine, 49, 556, 10.1093/occmed/49.8.556
Kanuk, 1975, Mail surveys and response rates: A literature review, Journal of Marketing Research, 12, 440, 10.2307/3151093
Katz, J., & Aspden, P. (1997). Motivations for and barriers to Internet usage: Results of a national public opinion survey. Paper presented at the 24th annual Telecommunications Policy Research Conference, Solomons, Maryland.
*Kim, 2000, Use of new technology in endourology and laparoscopy by American urologists: Internet and postal survey, Urology, 56
*Kim, 2001, Practice patterns in the treatment of female urinary incontinence: A postal and internet survey, Urology, 57, 45, 10.1016/S0090-4295(00)00885-2
*Kittleson, 1995, An assessment of the response rate via the postal service and email, Health Values, 18, 27
LaLonde, 1986, Evaluating the econometric evaluations of training programs with experimental data, American Economic Review, 76, 604
Linsky, 1975, Stimulating responses to mailed questionnaires: A review, Public Opinion Quarterly, 39, 82, 10.1086/268201
McCabe, 2004, Comparison of web and mail surveys in collecting illicit drug use data: A randomized experiment, Journal of Drug Education, 34, 61, 10.2190/4HEY-VWXL-DVR3-HAKV
McDonald, 2003, A comparison of online and postal data collection methods in marketing research, Marketing Intelligence and Planning, 21, 85, 10.1108/02634500310465399
Meinhold, S. S., & Gleiber, D. W. (2005). Using the internet to survey college students about their law school plans. A seminar report from Law School Admission Council (LSAC).
*Metha, 1995, Comparing response rates and response content in mail versus electronic mail surveys, Journal of Market Research Society, 37, 429
*Paolo, 2000, Response rate comparisons of e-mail and mail distributed student evaluations, Teaching and Learning in Medicine, 12, 81, 10.1207/S15328015TLM1202_4
*Parker, 1992, Collecting data the e-mail way, Training and Development, 52
Parnell, J. (1997). A Mannequin Without Clothes. Paper presented to BYTE Conference, Mastrict University, December.
Pitt, 1996, The use of electronic mail in undergraduate teaching, British Journal of Educational Technology, 27, 45, 10.1111/j.1467-8535.1996.tb00142.x
*Ranchhod, 2001, Comparing respondents of e-mail and mail surveys: Understanding the implications of technology, Marketing Intelligence and Planning, 19, 254, 10.1108/EUM0000000005556
Rosenthal, 1982, Comparing effect sizes of independent studies, Psychological Bulletin, 92, 500, 10.1037/0033-2909.92.2.500
*Sax, L. J., Gilmartin, S. K., Lee, J. J., & Hagedorn, L. S. (2003). Using web surveys to reach community college students: An analysis of response rates and response bias. Research paper presented at the annual conference of the Association of Institutional Research, Tampa, FL.
Schaefer, 1998, Development of a standard email methodology: Results of an experiment, Public Opinion Quarterly, 62, 378, 10.1086/297851
*Schuldt, 1994, Electronic mail versus mail survey response rates, Marketing Research, 6, 36
*Seguin, 2004, Email or snail mail? Randomized controlled trial on which works better for surveys, Canadian Family Physician, 50, 414
*Shermis, 1999, A comparison of survey data collected by regular mail and electronic mail questionnaires, Journal of Business and Psychology, 14, 341, 10.1023/A:1022103510980
*Smee, A., & Brenna, M. (2000). Electronic surveys: A comparison of e-mail, web and mail. Paper presented at ANZMAC 2000 Visionary Marketing for the 21st Century: Facing the Challenge, November 28–December 2, 2000, School of Marketing & Management, Griffith University, Australia, pp. 1201–1204.
Smith, C. B. (1997). Casting the net: Surveying an internet population. Journal of Communication Mediated by Computers 3 (1). Available online at http://www.ascusc.org/jcmc/vol3/issue1/.
Sparrow, 1995, Inner-city networking: Models and opportunities, Journal of Urban Technology, 3, 19, 10.1080/10630739508724514
*Stewart, 2005, B2B study finds lingering concerns about new tech: Retailers fret over loss of personal contact, costs & security, National Floor Trends, 7, 12
*Treat, 1997, The effects of questionnaire mode on response in a federal employee survey: Mail versus electronic mail, 600
Truell, 2002, Response rate, speed, and completeness: A comparison of internet-based and mail surveys, Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, & Computers, 34, 46, 10.3758/BF03195422
*Tse, 1998, Comparing the response rate, response speed and response quality of two methods of sending questionnaires: E-mail vs. mail, Journal of the Market Research Society, 40, 353
*Tse, 1995, Comparing two methods of sending out questionnaires: E-mail versus mail, Journal of the Market Research Society, 37, 441
*Weible, 1998, Cyber research: The impact of the internet on data collection, Market research, 10, 19
Wild, 1993, Remote collaboration among students using electronic mail, Computers and Education, 21, 193, 10.1016/0360-1315(93)90018-E
Yammarino, 1991, Understanding mail survey response behavior: A meta-analysis, Public Opinion Quarterly, 55, 539, 10.1086/269284
Yin, 2003, Assessing the invariance of self-concept measurement factor structure across ethnic and gender groups: Findings from a national sample, Educational and Psychological Measurement, 63, 296, 10.1177/0013164403251328