An Experimental Test of the Effects of Survey Sponsorship on Internet and Mail Survey Response

Abstract

Survey researchers have typically assumed that university sponsorship consistently increases response rates and reduces nonresponse error across different populations, but they have not tested the effects of utilizing different university sponsors to collect data from the same population. In addition, scholars have not examined how these effects differ for mixed-mode (web and mail) or mail-only data collection. To explore these questions, we conducted an experiment in spring 2012 with an addressbased sample of residents from two states (Washington and Nebraska), using two university sponsors (Washington State University and the University of Nebraska-Lincoln) and two modes (a sequential "web-push" design versus a mail-only design). We found that within-state-sponsored surveys tended to obtain higher response rates than out-of-state-sponsored surveys for both "web-push" and mail-only designs. Our study also investigates the impacts of mode and sponsor on the representativeness of survey estimates. digitalcommons.unl.edu 2 E d w a r d s , d i l l m a n , a n d s m y t h i n P u b l i c O P i n i O n Q u a r t e r l y ( 2 0 1 4 )

A Qualitative Study on the Consequences of Intensive Working

“…Further, while the influence of a spouse/partner on work patterns emerged in the data from some respondents, future studies could explore this factor more deeply as it relates to sustaining patterns of intensive work. Research designs that consider these factors along with survey timing (Pennings, Irwin & Good, 2002 ), the sender of a questionnaire (M. L. Edwards, Dillman, & Smyth, 2014 ), and sponsor prominence (Boulianne, Klofstad & Basson, 2010 ), along with the use of incentives to participate in the research (Göritz, 2004 ), may be useful research strategies to deliver a more proportional sample in future studies, thus allowing more representative analyses.…”

Drawing on LGB Identity to Encourage Participation and Disclosure of Sexual Orientation in Surveys

“…In addition, the university sponsorship might have been more salient in the no cover image treatment because there were no images to distract from it. Easily identifiable and likely positively valued university sponsorship might have motivated participation (Edwards, Dillman, and Smyth 2014). Although we cannot empirically identify why the default cover design depressed response rates, the finding suggests that a mail survey's cover design can affect response rates if questionnaire designers somehow get the cover design "wrong.…”

“…Additionally, those who are less tolerant of homosexuality might be acting in ways consistent with findings from cognitive interview testing of same-sex couple categories for marital status questions: they view the LGB-inclusivity unfavorably, but will still respond to the survey (Ridolfo, Perez, and Miller 2011). It is also possible that the omnibus survey's topics or university sponsorship held more leverage for motivating participation than the LGB-inclusivity had at diminishing it among those who tend to be less tolerant of homosexuality (Edwards, Dillman, and Smyth 2014). For example, the university sponsorship may have overridden any negative perceptions of the LGB cover images.…”

Social Inequalities and the Effects of Incentives on Survey Participation: A Recruitment Experiment

“…Alternative factors here are survey mode, sponsorship, the number of contacts, the reminder or the device used to participate in the survey, all of which could be explored to better understand survey participation as a holistic concept. Edwards et al (2014) have shown that survey sponsorship increases survey participation. Converse et al (2008) have provided evidence for differences in response rates according to the order of the survey modes in mixed-mode surveys.…”