Nonresponse in Mail Surveys: Access Failure or Respondent Resistance

Sosdian, Carol P.; Sharp, Laure M.

doi:10.1086/268606

Cited by 43 publications

(36 citation statements)

References 11 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…However, another possibility is that a proportion of correctly addressed questionnaires (verified from the telephone directory) may not have reached their correct destination. This possibility could not be verified but deserves further investigation, since it would account for approximately 10 percent of the people who did not respond to the mail survey and is consistent with findings reported by Sosdian and Sharp (1980). Differences in the speed of response of the four groups are also evident (see table 2).…”

Section: Results: Response Ratementioning

confidence: 52%

The Behavior of Respondents, Nonrespondents, and Refusers Across Mail Surveys

Brennan

Hoek

1992

Public Opinion Quarterly

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Although numerous studies have attempted to measure nonresponse bias by comparing the characteristics of respondents and nonrespondents, most studies have restricted their comparisons to the outcome of a single survey and typically treat nonrespondents as a homogeneous group. However, with regard to mail surveys at least, several studies have noted the importance of distinguishing between nonresponse due to noncompliance and nonresponse due to inaccessibility (Mayer and Pratt 1966;Stinchcombe, Jones, and Sheatsley 1981), raising the possibility that different groups of nonrespondents may have different predispositions toward survey participation.In order to measure a person's predisposition toward survey participation, it is necessary to examine their behavior across surveys. To date, only one published study appears to have done this. Stinchcombe, Jones, and Sheatsley (1981) compared the characteristics and attitudes of early responders, late responders, nonresponders, and refusers to a telephone survey of farmers by examining the responses and participation history of these same farmers to previous mail surveys. They found that the tendency to refuse to participate in surveys was not related to accessibility, or vice versa, and provided evidence that hard-core refusers demonstrated quite different attitudes and behavior from both those easily interviewed and those difficult to contact.Generalizations from Stinchcombe, Jones, and Sheatsley's findings are limited because of the highly specialized sampling frame and topic. But the possibility that respondents, refusers, and other nonrespondents may have different predispositions toward survey participation has important implications for how surveys are conducted and how the effectiveness of survey methods is assessed. The purpose of the We wish to thank the Massey University Research Fund Committee for providing financial assistance for this project.

show abstract

Section: Results: Response Ratementioning

confidence: 52%

The Behavior of Respondents, Nonrespondents, and Refusers Across Mail Surveys

Brennan

Hoek

1992

Public Opinion Quarterly

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Respondent burden is defined as the fatigue, stress, time, and other costs associated with completing surveys, which can be substantial especially when multiple or lengthy surveys are administered (Bradburn, 1977;Golinelli et al, 2010;Sharp & Frankel, 1983;Tourangeau et al, 2000). Survey fatigue may result in people failing to read survey questions and responding randomly (Porter, Whitcomb, & Weitzer, 2004;Sharp & Frankel, 1983;Sosdian & Sharp, 1980). Cape (2010) concluded that overburdened survey respondents do not care about the quality of their participation, suggesting that one should be cautious about overwhelming people by asking an excessive number of questions.…”

Section: Survey Lengthmentioning

confidence: 99%

The survey effect: Does administering surveys affect trainees' behavior?

Sitzmann¹,

Wang²

2015

Learning and Individual Differences

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Empirical studies have indicated that active nonresponse is not as frequent as fearedsomewhere between 9% and 16% (Rogelberg et al, 2000(Rogelberg et al, , 2003Sosdian & Sharp, 1980, Youssefnia, 2000.…”

Section: Global Research Conceptsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Innovative Surveillance and Risk Reduction Systems for Family Maltreatment, Suicidality, and Substance Problems in the USAF

Heyman¹

2006

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Public reportling D_ ne" or this coilection of information is estimatec to eve-age ' lo, ce, -es:ose, -c'.n• c e 2 -e c--ev ew ag -su c`or's' search ng exsting data sources, gathering and maintainr'o the data needed, and completing and reviewing this collection of information. Send comments regarding this burden estimate or any other aspect of this collection of information, including suggestions for reducing this burden to Washington Headquarters Services, Directorate for Information Operations and Reports, 1215 Jefferson Davis Highway, Suite 1204, Arlington, VA 22202-4302, and ABSTRACT (Maximum 200 Words)This project aims to enhance the capacity of the Air Force (AF) to reduce death, injury, and degraded force readiness via reduction of the prevalence and impact of famiy maltreatment, suicidality, and alcohol/drug problems. Managing risk and increasing resilience in military human resources (i.e., "Force Health Protection") is a top priority for DoD and Armed Forces leadership. The objective of this study is to enhance the AF's current prevention delivery (known as the Integrated Delivery System; IDS) infrastructure through (a) development and validation of an information system needed to direct prevention efforts more effectively and efficiently; (b) adoption of a prevention-science-based approach; and (c) evaluation of its effectiveness. When funded, the proposed project was broken into two phases. This first phase is a demonstration project on which to build a randomized trial. This project includes: (a) pilot testing the development of an innovative surveillance system and validating its accuracy (at 3 AF bases) for family maltreatment, suicidality, and problematic alcohol and drug use, and (b) pilot testing the creation of an enhanced IDS by training community leaders in preventionscience-based intervention methodology and testing the impact on factors that are prerequisites for effective community prevention initiatives and on targeted outcomes.

show abstract

Nonresponse in Mail Surveys: Access Failure or Respondent Resistance

Cited by 43 publications

References 11 publications

The Behavior of Respondents, Nonrespondents, and Refusers Across Mail Surveys

The Behavior of Respondents, Nonrespondents, and Refusers Across Mail Surveys

The survey effect: Does administering surveys affect trainees' behavior?

Innovative Surveillance and Risk Reduction Systems for Family Maltreatment, Suicidality, and Substance Problems in the USAF

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About