Improving Response to Web and Mixed-Mode Surveys

Millar, Morgan M.; Dillman, Don A.

doi:10.1093/poq/nfr003

Cited by 343 publications

(342 citation statements)

References 14 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

307

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…[40][41][42] The research literature does suggest that web surveys may encounter response problems when they are conducted with groups of people who are infrequent or unconfident users of the internet. 43 However, the recipients of the web survey in this study were a highly information technology (IT)-literate group of individuals who worked in largely desk-based jobs at research-related organisations: key research funders, major research producers and key research intermediaries. Thus, the web survey was an appropriate research method to use with this group.…”

Section: Web Surveymentioning

confidence: 99%

Mobilising knowledge to improve UK health care: learning from other countries and other sectors – a multimethod mapping study

Davies

Powell

Nutley

2015

Health Services and Delivery Research

114

176

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundThe past two decades have seen rich conceptual development and a wide variety of practical initiatives around research use or ‘knowledge mobilisation’, but so far there has been little systematic effort to map, conceptualise and learn from these initiatives, or to investigate the degree to which they are underpinned by contemporary thinking as set out in the literature. This gap is particularly apparent when looking at knowledge mobilisation at the ‘macro’ level, that is the strategies and activities of major research funders, major research producers and key research ‘intermediaries’.Aims and objectivesThe study had three key objectives with associated research questions: to map the knowledge mobilisation landscape in health care (in the UK and internationally) and in social care and education within the UK; to understand the models, theories and frameworks that underpin the approaches to knowledge mobilisation; and to learn from the success or otherwise of the strategies and approaches in use.MethodsThe study was multimethod and multiphased, with considerable interactivity between the different strands. Data were collected through a review of 71 published reviews on knowledge mobilisation; website review of the knowledge mobilisation activities of 186 agencies; in-depth interviews (n = 52) with key individuals in agencies; a web survey (response rate 57%;n = 106); and two stakeholder workshops (at months 6 and 16).FindingsWe identified a wide range of models, theories and frameworks used to describe knowledge mobilisation and created a conceptual map that highlights six domains of thinking and debate in the literature. The interview and survey data showed three broad, overlapping roles undertaken by agencies: developing and sharing research-based products; emphasising brokering; and focusing on implementation. The knowledge mobilisation approaches in use had been shaped by many factors but there was only limited use of the models, theories and frameworks from the literature. Participants saw formal evaluation of knowledge mobilisation activities as important but highly challenging. Rich formative experience was described but formal evaluation was relatively rare. Few agencies involved service users or members of the public in knowledge mobilisation activities. Working inductively from the study data we derived eight key archetypes or ‘bundles of knowledge mobilisation activities’ that could be used by agencies to explore their knowledge mobilisation activities, future strategies and stakeholder perspectives.ConclusionsKnowledge mobilisation could be enhanced by providing support to enable cross-sector and interagency learning, reflection on the conceptual basis of approaches and increased evaluation of knowledge mobilisation activities. Further research is needed to evaluate approaches to assessing research use and impact, on systems approaches to knowledge mobilisation, on sustaining and scaling-up approaches, and on applying a wider range of literatures to knowledge mobilisation. Further research would also be useful on the knowledge mobilisation archetypes and how they can work in complementary ways.FundingThe National Institute for Health Research Health Services and Delivery Research programme.

show abstract

Section: Web Surveymentioning

confidence: 99%

Mobilising knowledge to improve UK health care: learning from other countries and other sectors – a multimethod mapping study

Davies

Powell

Nutley

2015

Health Services and Delivery Research

114

176

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Responses were received from 1017 students, with 886 usable for data analysis, reflecting a 22% response rate. Typically, the average response rate for internet-based surveys is 25%, much lower than that of mail surveys (Dillman, 2007;Manfreda et al, 2008;Millar and Dillman, 2011). The distribution of participants by gender was 60% female and 40% male.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Approaching Safety through Quality: Factors Influencing College Student Perceptions

2016

J. Agric. Safety and Health

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Quality management practices have been identified by previous literature as a factor that could potentially reduce the level of safety incidents and hazards in agricultural work environments. The present study used multivariate analysis to examine the effect of independent variables such as quality and safety awareness, work experience, safety and quality management experience, and the perceived importance of safety and quality on the role of quality management practices as a mitigating factor for safety hazards and incidents in agriculture. Variables were measured on a five-point scale using a survey questionnaire. Data were collected from approximately 900 undergraduates enrolled in the College of Agriculture and Life Sciences at a large land grant university in the U.S. The level of student work experience and student perceptions of the importance of quality explained a significant amount of the variance in student views of quality management practices as a mitigating factor for safety hazards and incidents. The findings of this study provide further evidence for using quality management practices as a basis for safety interventions targeted at the agricultural workforce. KeywordsCollege students, Quality management, Worker safety

show abstract

“…Providing incentives to panel members is a survey industry best practice, and there is ample evidence that it helps to limit attrition (see, e.g., Göritz, 2006, andMillar andDillman, 2011). Moreover, the evidence suggests that incentives have a positive effect on representativeness and data quality (see, e.g., Mack et al, 1998).…”

Section: Data-collection Proceduresmentioning

confidence: 99%

The RAND American Life Panel: Technical Description

Pollard¹,

Baird²

2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This document and trademark(s) contained herein are protected by law. This representation of RAND intellectual property is provided for noncommercial use only. Unauthorized posting of this publication online is prohibited. Permission is given to duplicate this document for personal use only, as long as it is unaltered and complete. Permission is required from RAND to reproduce, or reuse in another form, any of its research documents for commercial use. For information on reprint and linking permissions, please visit www.rand.org/pubs/permissions.The RAND Corporation is a research organization that develops solutions to public policy challenges to help make communities throughout the world safer and more secure, healthier and more prosperous. RAND is nonprofit, nonpartisan, and committed to the public interest.RAND's publications do not necessarily reflect the opinions of its research clients and sponsors.Support RAND Make a tax-deductible charitable contribution at www.rand.org/giving/contribute www.rand.org For more information on this publication, visit www.rand.org/t/RR1651Published by the RAND Corporation, Santa Monica, Calif. © Copyright 2017 RAND CorporationR® is a registered trademark.iii PrefaceThis report describes the methodology behind the RAND American Life Panel. This research was undertaken within RAND Labor and Population. RAND Labor and Population has built an international reputation for conducting objective, high-quality, empirical research to support and improve policies and organizations around the world. Its work focuses on children and families, demographic behavior, education and training, labor markets, social welfare policy, immigration, international development, financial decisionmaking, and issues related to aging and retirement, with a common aim of understanding how policy and social and economic forces affect individual decisionmaking and human well-being.For more information on RAND Labor and Population, contact

show abstract

Improving Response to Web and Mixed-Mode Surveys

Cited by 343 publications

References 14 publications

Mobilising knowledge to improve UK health care: learning from other countries and other sectors – a multimethod mapping study

Mobilising knowledge to improve UK health care: learning from other countries and other sectors – a multimethod mapping study

Approaching Safety through Quality: Factors Influencing College Student Perceptions

The RAND American Life Panel: Technical Description

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About