[en] In times of decreasing response rates and survey participation, many ‘best-practices’ have been developed for increasing survey recruitment. However, most of these have never been adequately and experimentally scrutinized for their efficacy. Therefore, in this research note, we draw on probability-based data of an online panel and experimentally examine whether it is possible to increase survey participation behavior by communicating a deadline extension. Overall, our results show that it is possible to influence participation behavior by deadline communication. While overall response speed was significantly faster when a deadline
extension was communicated, the overall response rate was slightly lower, compared to scenarios in which no deadline extension was communicated. Thus, we refrain from recommending a deadline extension unless there are specific reasons to do so.
Disciplines :
Sociology & social sciences
Author, co-author :
Decieux, Jean Philippe Pierre ; University of Luxembourg > Faculty of Language and Literature, Humanities, Arts and Education (FLSHASE) > Integrative Research Unit: Social and Individual Development (INSIDE)
Heinz, Andreas ; University of Luxembourg > Faculty of Humanities, Education and Social Sciences (FHSE) > Department of Social Sciences (DSOC)
External co-authors :
yes
Language :
English
Title :
Does a short-term deadline extension affect participation rates of an online survey? Experimental evidence from an online panel
Publication date :
02 December 2022
Journal title :
International Journal of Social Research Methodology
Bethlehem, J., Cobben, F., & Schouten, B., (2011). Handbook of nonresponse in household surveys (Vol. 568). John Wiley & Sons.
Blumenberg, C., Menezes, A. M. B., Goncalves, H., Assuncao, M. C. F., Wehrmeister, F. C., Barros, F. C., & Barros, A. J. D. (2019). The role of questionnaire length and reminders frequency on response rates to a web-based epidemiologic study: A randomised trial. International Journal of Social Research Methodology, 22(6), 625–635. https://doi.org/10.1080/13645579.2019.1629755
Brenner, P. S., Cosenza, C., & Fowler, F. J. (2020). Which subject lines and messages improve response to E-mail invitations to web surveys?Field Methods, 32(4), 365–382. https://doi.org/10.1177/1525822X20929647
Cook, C., Heath, F., & Thompson, R. L., (2000). A Meta-Analysis of Response Rates in Web- or Internet-Based Surveys. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 60(6), 821–836. https://doi.org/10.1177/00131640021970934
de Leeuw, E. D., & Lugtig, P. (2015). Dropouts in longitudinal surveys. In T. C., Balakrishnan, B., Everitt, W., Piegorsch, F., Ruggeri, & J. L., Teugels Eds., Wiley STATSREF: Statistics reference online. 1–6. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118445112.stat06661.pub2
Dillman, D. A., Smyth, J. D., & Christian, L. M. (2014). Internet, phone, mail, and mixed-mode surveys: The tailored design method. John Wiley & Sons.
Ette, A., Décieux, J. P., Erlinghagen, M., Genoni, A., Guedes Auditor, J., Knrisch, F., Kühne, S., Sand, M., Mörchen, L., & Nils, W. (2020). German emigration and remigration panel study: methodology and data manual of the baseline survey (Wave 1). BiB Daten- und Methodenberichte, Issue.
Fan, W., & Yan, Z. (2010). Factors affecting response rates of the web survey: A systematic review. Computers in Human Behavior, 26(2), 132–139. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2009.10.015
Göritz, A. S., & Stieger, S. (2009). The impact of the field time on response, retention, and response completeness in list-based Web surveys. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 67(4), 342–348. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhcs.2008.10.002
Greenberg, P., & Dillman, D. (2021). Mail communications and survey response: A test of social exchange versus pre-suasion theory for improving response rates and data quality. Journal of Survey Statistics and Methodology. https://doi.org/10.1093/jssam/smab020
Groves, R. M., Cialdini, R. B., & Couper, M. P. (1992). Understanding the decision to participate in a survey. Public Opinion Quarterly, 56(4), 475–495. https://doi.org/10.1086/269338
Hooghe, M., & Stiers, D. (2022). Short take: Do postal stamps (still) lead to a higher response rate? An empirical test in belgium. Field Methods, 1525822X211072350. https://doi.org/10.1177/1525822X211072350
Keusch, F. (2015). Why do people participate in web surveys? Applying survey participation theory to Internet survey data collection. Management Review Quarterly, 65(3), 183–216. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11301-014-0111-y
Lynn, P. (2016). Targeted appeals for participation in letters to panel survey members. Public Opinion Quarterly, 80(3), 771–782. https://doi.org/10.1093/poq/nfw024
Maineri, A. M., & Van Mol, C. (2021). An experimental study on the impact of contact design on web survey participation. Social Science Computer Review, 08944393211003482. https://doi.org/10.1177/08944393211003482
Park, Y., & Tsuchiya, T. (2021). Improving mail survey response rates in Japan: Empirical tests for envelopes, request letters, questionnaires, and schedules. International Journal of Social Research Methodology, 24(1), 15–29. https://doi.org/10.1080/13645579.2020.1756618
Porter, S. R., & Whitcomb, M. E. (2003). The impact of contact type on web survey response rates. The Public Opinion Quarterly, 67(4), 579–588. https://doi.org/10.1086/378964
Roberts, R. E., McCrory, O. F., & Forthofer, R. N. (1978). Further evidence on using a deadline to stimulate responses to a mail survey. The Public Opinion Quarterly, 42(3), 407–410. https://doi.org/10.1086/268464
Sappleton, N., & Lourenço, F. (2016). Email subject lines and response rates to invitations to participate in a web survey and a face-to-face interview: The sound of silence. International Journal of Social Research Methodology, 19(5), 611–622. https://doi.org/10.1080/13645579.2015.1078596
Sun, H., Newsome, J., McNulty, J., Levin, K., Langetieg, P., Schafer, B., & Guyton, J. (2020). What works, what doesn’t? Three studies designed to improve survey response. Field Methods, 1525822X20915464. https://doi.org/10.1177/1525822X20915464
Van Mol, C. (2017). Improving web survey efficiency: The impact of an extra reminder and reminder content on web survey response. International Journal of Social Research Methodology, 20(4), 317–327. https://doi.org/10.1080/13645579.2016.1185255