Abstract
Individual strategies to increase response rate and survey completion have been extensively researched. Recently, efforts have been made to investigate a combination of interventions to yield better response rates for web-based surveys. This study examined the effects of four different survey invitation conditions on response rate. From a large metropolitan university in the West, a group of 1,598 selected students were randomly assigned to four groups, each of which received a different version of the invitation email to participate in a survey of campus technology needs. Findings show that neither the degree of personalization nor the length of the invitation email impacted survey response or completion. Additionally, the outcomes demonstrated the impact of research-based “best practices” and their impact on overall response rate.
This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.
References
Archer, T. M. (2008). Response rates to expect from web-based surveys and what to do about it. Journal of Extension, 46(3). Retrieved from http://www.joe.org/joe/2008june/rb3.php.
Baruch, Y., & Brooks, C. H. (2008). Survey response rate levels and trends in organizational research. Human Relations, 61, 1139–1160. doi:10.1177/0018726708094863.
Bosnjak, M., & Tuten, T. L. (2003). Prepaid and promised incentives in web surveys: an experiment. Social Science Computer Review, 21, 208–217. doi:10.1177/0894439303021002006.
Burkell, J. (2003). The dilemma of survey nonresponse. Library and Information Science Research, 25(3), 239–263. doi:10.1016/S0740-8188(03)00029-X.
Church, A. H. (1993). Estimating the effect of incentives on mail survey response rates: a meta-analysis. Public Opinion Quarterly, 57(1), 62–79. doi:10.1086/269355.
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. doi:10.1177/00131640021970934.
Dillman, D. A. (2007). Mail and internet surveys: The tailored design method (2nd ed.). Hoboken: Wiley.
Doucheneaut, N., & Bellotti, V. (2001). Email as habitat: an exploration of embedded personal information management. Interactions, 8(5), 30–38.
Fan, W., & Zheng, Y. (2010). Factors affecting response rates of the web survey: a systematic review. Computers in Human Behavior, 26(2), 132–139. doi:10.1016/j.chb.2009.10.015.
Heerwegh, D. (2005). Effects of personal salutations in e-mail invitations to participate in a web survey. Public Opinion Quarterly, 69(4), 588–598. doi:10.1093/poq/nfi053.
Heerwegh, D. (2006). An investigation of the effect of lotteries on web survey response rates. Field Methods, 18(2), 205–220. doi:10.1177/1525822X05285781.
Heerwegh, D., Vanhove, T., Matthijs, K., & Loosveldt, G. (2005). The effect of personalization on response rates and data quality in web surveys. International Journal of Social Research Methodology, 18(2), 85–99. doi:10.1080/1364557042000203107.
Joinson, A. N., & Reips, U.-D. (2007). Personalized salutation, power of sender, and response rates to web-based surveys. Computers in Human Behavior, 23(3), 1372–1383. doi:10.1016/j.chb.2004.12.011.
Joinson, A. N., Woodley, A., & Reips, U.-D. (2007). Personalization, authentication and self-disclosure in self-administered internet surveys. Computers in Human Behavior, 23(1), 275–285. doi:10.1016/j.chb.2004.10.012.
Klofstad, C. A., Boulianne, S., & Basson, D. (2008). Matching the message to the medium. Social Science Computer Review, 26(4), 498–509. doi:10.1177/0894439308314145.
Kypros, K., Gallagher, S. J., & Cashell-Smith, M. L. (2004). An internet-based survey method for college drinking research. Drug and Alcohol Dependence, 76(1), 45–53. doi:10.1016/j.drugalcdep.2004.04.001.
Marcus, B., Bosnjak, M., Lindner, S., Pilischenko, S., & Shütz, A. (2007). Compensating for low topic interest and long surveys. Social Science Computer Review, 25(3), 372–383. doi:10.1177/0894439307297606.
Pearson, J. & Levine, R.A. (2003). Salutations and response rates to online surveys. Paper presented at the Association for Survey Computing Fourth International Conference on the Impact of Technology on the Survey Process, University of Warwick, England.
Perkins, R.A. (2011). Using research‐based practices to increase response rates of web‐based surveys. EDUCAUSE Quarterly, 32(2). Retrieved from http://www.educause.edu/eq.
Porter, S. R. (2004). Raising response rates: what works? New Directions for Institutional Research, 121, 5–21. doi:10.1002/ir.97.
Porter, S. R., & Whitcomb, M. E. (2003a). The impact of contact type on web survey response rates. Public Opinion Quarterly, 67(4), 579–588. doi:10.1086/378964.
Porter, S. R., & Whitcomb, M. E. (2003b). The impact of lottery incentives on student survey response rates. Research in Higher Education, 44(4), 389–407. doi:10.1023/A:1024263031800.
Porter, S. R., & Whitcomb, M. E. (2005). Email subject lines and their effect on web survey viewing and response. Social Science Computer Review, 23(3), 380–387. doi:10.1177/0894439305275912.
Rettie, R. & Chittenden, L. (2003). Email marketing: Success factors. Occasional Paper Series No 50. U.K.: Kingston Business School, Kingston University.
Trouteaud, A. R. (2004). How you ask counts: a test of internet-related components of response rates to a web-based survey. Social Science Computer Review, 22(3), 385–392. doi:10.1177/0894439304265650.
Tuten, T. L. (1997). Getting a foot in the electronic door: Understanding why people read or delete electronic mail (Rep. No. 97/08). Mannheim: Zentrum fuer Umfragen, Methoden und Analysen.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Appendix
Appendix
Email #1: High Information & High Personalization Group
SUBJECT LINE: Your input requested for Student Computing Needs Survey
Hi, {FIRST NAME}!
We recently added $5.00 to your BroncoCard in advance of your kind completion of the survey linked below. When you complete the survey, which should take only 10 to 15 min of your time, you can register for a random drawing of $250.
As a {CLASS LEVEL} {MAJOR}, you have a unique perspective to offer regarding student computing needs on campus. The {DEPARTMENT} will benefit from the feedback offered by concerned {STATUS} like yourself.
The UITAC, or the University Information Technology Advisory Committee, offers recommendations about the distribution of student computer fees to units such as colleges and departments. The reason we have developed the survey is to get student input about information technology resources on Boise State’s main campus.
As you might be aware, some of the student fees you pay annually are designated for the maintenance and upgrading of designated labs on campus. But are those fees being used in the best way possible? Are the computing resources located in the right places? Is student access to the technology resources adequate? Are more funds needed for a stronger wireless network as more and more students use laptops or other wireless devices? These are the types of questions that we ask, and we hope that you can provide some insight.
Again, we appreciate your time in helping us better understand the needs you have with regard to on-campus technology resources. This information, in turn, will assist us in forming recommendations about how to put computing fees to the best possible use.
To take the survey, {SurveyLink}
Or copy and paste the URL below into your internet browser: {SurveyLink}
Best regards,
Members of the University Information Technology Advisory Committee
Boise State University
More info: [URL about survey]
Email #2: High Information & Low Personalization Group
SUBJECT LINE: Your input requested for Student Computing Needs Survey
Hi, {FIRST NAME}!
We recently added $5.00 to your BroncoCard in advance of your kind completion of the survey linked below. When you complete the survey, which should take only 10 to 15 min of your time, you can register for a random drawing of $250.
You are being invited to take this survey because of the unique perspective you have to offer regarding student computing needs on campus. The department and college in which you study will benefit from the feedback offered by concerned students like yourself.
The UITAC, or the University Information Technology Advisory Committee, offers recommendations about the distribution of student computer fees to units such as colleges and departments. The reason we have developed the survey is to get student input about information technology resources on Boise State’s main campus.
As you might be aware, some of the student fees you pay annually are designated for the maintenance and upgrading of designated labs on campus. But are those fees being used in the best way possible? Are the computing resources located in the right places? Is student access to the technology resources adequate? Are more funds needed for a stronger wireless network as more and more students use laptops or other wireless devices? These are the types of questions that we ask, and we hope that you can provide some insight.
Again, we appreciate your time in helping us better understand the needs you have with regard to on-campus technology resources. This information, in turn, will assist us in forming recommendations about how to put computing fees to the best possible use.
To take the survey, {SURVEY LINK}
Or copy and paste the URL below into your internet browser:{SURVEY LINK}
Best regards,
Members of the University Information Technology Advisory Committee
Boise State University
More info: [URL about survey]
Email #3: Low Information & High Personalization Group
SUBJECT LINE: Your input requested for Student Computing Needs Survey
Hi, {FIRST NAME}!
We recently added $5.00 to your BroncoCard in advance of your kind completion of the survey linked below. When you complete the survey, which should take only 10 to 15 min of your time, you can register for a random drawing of $250.
As a {CLASS LEVEL} {MAJOR}, you have a unique perspective to offer regarding student computing needs on campus. The {DEPARTMENT} will benefit from the feedback offered by concerned {STATUS} like yourself.
To take the survey, {SURVEY LINK}
Or copy and paste the URL below into your internet browser: {SURVEY LINK}
Best regards,
Members of the University Information Technology Advisory Committee
Boise State University
More info: [URL about survey]
Email #4: Low Information & Low Personalization Group
SUBJECT LINE: Your input requested for Student Computing Needs Survey
Hi, {FIRST NAME}!
We recently added $5.00 to your BroncoCard in advance of your kind completion of the survey linked below. When you complete the survey, which should take only 10 to 15 min of your time, you can register for a random drawing of $250.
You are being invited to take this survey because of the unique perspective you have to offer regarding student computing needs on campus. The department and college in which you study will benefit from the feedback offered by concerned students like yourself.
To take the survey, {SURVEY LINK}
Or copy and paste the URL below into your internet browser: {SURVEY LINK}
Best regards,
Members of the University Information Technology Advisory Committee
Boise State University
More info: [URL about survey]
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Trespalacios, J.H., Perkins, R.A. Effects of Personalization and Invitation Email Length on Web-Based Survey Response Rates. TechTrends 60, 330–335 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11528-016-0058-z
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11528-016-0058-z
Keywords
- Survey research
- Email personalization
- Message length
- Response rates