Skip to main content
Disciplines
Automotive Business IT + Informatics Construction + Real Estate Electrical Engineering + Electronics Energy + Sustainability Insurance + Risk Finance + Banking Management + Leadership Marketing + Sales Mechanical Engineering + Materials
Events
DE
EN
Books
Journals
Topic Page
Marketing
Start single access now
Access for companies
EXTENDED SEARCH
Log in
Top
Management Review Quarterly
Published in: Management Review Quarterly 3/2015

01-06-2015 | State-of-the-Art

Why do people participate in Web surveys? Applying survey participation theory to Internet survey data collection

Author: Florian Keusch

Published in: Management Review Quarterly | Issue 3/2015

Log in

Activate our intelligent search to find suitable subject content or patents.

search-config
loading …

Abstract

In recent years Web surveys have emerged as the most popular mode of primary data collection in market and social research. To improve our understanding about the influence of different societal-level factors, characteristics of the sample person, and attributes of the survey design on participation in Web surveys, this paper establishes a systematic link between theoretical frameworks used to explain survey participation behavior and state-of-the-art empirical research on online data collection methods. The concepts of self-perception, cognitive dissonance, commitment and involvement, social exchange, compliance, leverage-salience, and planned behavior are discussed and their relationship with factors that have empirically proven to influence Web survey participation are analyzed using data from an expert survey. This paper will help researchers and practitioners to make informed decisions about the use of techniques increasing participation in Web surveys.
previous article What customer information should companies use for customer relationship management? Practical insights from empirical research

Dont have a licence yet? Then find out more about our products and how to get one now:

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

  • über 102.000 Bücher
  • über 537 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

  • Automobil + Motoren
  • Bauwesen + Immobilien
  • Business IT + Informatik
  • Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
  • Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
  • Finance + Banking
  • Management + Führung
  • Marketing + Vertrieb
  • Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe
  • Versicherung + Risiko

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

inform now

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

  • über 67.000 Bücher
  • über 340 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

  • Bauwesen + Immobilien
  • Business IT + Informatik
  • Finance + Banking
  • Management + Führung
  • Marketing + Vertrieb
  • Versicherung + Risiko




Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

inform now
Appendix
Available only for authorised users
Footnotes
1
Strictly speaking, commitment and involvement are individual determinants of (non)participation in a survey and not a theory per se. However, for the purpose of this paper I will use Albaum and Smith (2012)’s terminology and treat ‘commitment/involvement’ as equivalent to other, more established theoretical frameworks of survey participation.
 
Literature
Ajzen I (1987) Attitudes, trends, and actions: dispositional prediction of behavior in personality and social psychology. Adv Exp Soc Psychol 20:1–63
Ajzen I (1991) The theory of planned behavior. Organ Behav Hum Decis Process 50:179–211
Albaum G, Smith SM (2012) Why people agree to participate in surveys. In: Gideon L (ed) Handbook of survey methodology for the social sciences. Springer, New York, pp 179–193
Albaum GS, Evangelista F, Medina L (1998) Role of response behavior theory in survey research: a cross-national study. J Bus Res 42:115–125
Allen CT, Schewe CD, Wijk G (1980) More on self-perception theory’s foot technique in the pre-call/mail survey setting. J Mark Res 17:498–502
Batinic B (2002) Online-Marktforschung auf dem Prüfstand. In: Diller H (ed) Neue Entwicklungen in der Marktforschung. Gesellschaft für Innovatives Marketing e.V., Nürnberg, pp 77–95
Batinic B, Moser K (2005) Determinanten der Rücklaufquote in Online-Panels. Z Medienpsychol 17:64–74
Becker HS (1960) Notes on the concept of commitment. Am J Sociol 66:32–40
Bem DJ (1972) Self-perception theory. Adv Exp Soc Psychol 6:1–62
Bethlehem J, Stoop I (2007) Online panels—a paradigma theft? In: Trotman M, Burrell T, Gerrard L, Anderton K, Basi G, Couper M, Morris K, Birks D, Johnson AJ, Baker R, Rigg M, Taylor S, Westlake A (eds) ASC 2007. The challenges of a changing world. Proceedings of the 5th international conference of the association for survey computing. ASC, Berkeley, pp 113–131
Birnholtz JP, Horn DB, Finholt TA, Bae SJ (2004) The effect of cash, electronic, and paper gift certificate as respondent incentives for a Web-based survey of technologically sophisticated respondents. Soc Sci Comput Rev 22:355–362
Bosnjak M, Batinic B (1999) Determinanten der Teilnahmebereitschaft an Internet-basierten Fragebogenuntersuchungen am Beispiel E-Mail. In: Batinic B, Werner A, Gräf L, Bandilla W (eds) Online research. Methoden, Anwendungen und Ergebnisse. Hogrefe, Göttingen et al, pp 145–157
Bosnjak M, Tuten TL (2003) Prepaid and promised incentives in Web surveys. An experiment. Soc Sci Comput Rev 21:208–217
Bosnjak M, Tuten TL, Wittmann WW (2005) Unit (non)response in Web-based access panel surveys: an extended planned-behavior approach. Psychol Mark 22:489–505
Bosnjak M, Neubarth W, Couper MP, Bandilla W, Kaczmirek L (2008) Prenotification in Web-based access panel surveys. The influence of mobile text messaging versus e-mail on response rates and sample composition. Soc Sci Comput Rev 26:213–223
Boulianne S (2012) Examining the gender effects of different incentive amounts in a Web survey. Field Methods 25:91–104
Boulianne S, Klofstad CA, Basson D (2011) Sponsor prominence and response patterns to an online survey. Int J Public Opin Res 23:79–87
Brennan M, Hoek J (1992) The behavior of respondents, nonrespondents, and refusers across mail surveys. Public Opin Q 56:530–535
Brüggen E, Dholakia UM (2010) Determinants of participation and response effort in Web panel surveys. J Interact Mark 24:239–250
Brüggen E, Wetzels M, de Ruyter K, Schillewaert N (2011) Individual differences in motivation to participate in online panels. The effect on response rate and response quality perceptions. Int J Mark Res 53:369–390
Bruvold NT, Comer JM, Rospert AM (1990) Interactive effects of major response facilitators. Decis Sci 21:551–562
Burgesse C, Nicholas J, Gulliford M (2012) Impact of an electronic, computer-delivered questionnaire, with or without postal reminders, on survey response rate in primary care. J Epidemiol Community Health 66:663–664
Busby DM, Yoshida K (2013) Challenges with online research for couples and families: evaluating nonrespondents and the differential impact of incentives. J Child Fam Stud. Advance online publication. doi:10.​1007/​s10826-013-9863-6
Cavusgil ST, Elvey-Kirk LA (1998) Mail survey response behaviour. A conceptualization of motivating factors and an empirical study. Eur J Mark 32:1165–1192
Cho YI, Johnson TP, VanGeest JB (2013) Enhancing surveys of health care professionals: a meta-analysis of techniques to improve response. Eval Health Prof 36:382–407
Church AH (1993) Estimating the effect of incentives on mail survey response rates: a meta-analysis. Public Opin Q 57:62–79
Cialdini RB (2009) Influence. Science and practice, 5th edn. Pearson, Boston
Cobanoglu C, Cobanoglu N (2003) The effect of incentives in Web surveys: application and ethical consideration. Int J Mark Res 45:475–488
Comley P (2000) Pop-up surveys. What works, what doesn’t work and what will work in the future. In: Brooks R (ed) Mark research in a .com environment. Esomar monograph no. 10. ESOMAR, Amsterdam, pp 181–189
Conrad FG, Couper MP, Tourangeau R, Peytchev A (2010) The impact of progress indicators on task completion. Interact Comput 22:417–427
Cook C, Heath F, Thompson RL (2000) A meta-analysis of response rates in Web- or Internet-based surveys. Educ Psychol Meas 60:821–836
Cooper H (2010) Research synthesis and meta-analysis. A step-by-step approach, 4th edn. Sage, Los Angeles
Couper MP (2000) Web surveys. A review of issues and approaches. Public Opin Q 64:464–494
Couper MP (2005) Technological trends in survey data collection. Soc Sci Comput Rev 23:486–501
Couper MP, Trautgott MW, Lamias MJ (2001) Web survey design and administration. Public Opin Q 65:230–253
Crawford SD, Couper MP, Lamias MJ (2001) Web surveys. Perception of burden. Soc Sci Comput Rev 19:146–162
Curtin R, Presser S, Singer E (2005) Changes in telephone survey nonresponse over the past quarter century. Public Opin Q 69:87–98
de Leeuw E, de Heer W (2002) Trends in household survey nonresponse: a longitudinal and international perspective. In: Groves RM, Dillman DA, Eltinge JL, Little RJA (eds) Survey nonresponse. Wiley, New York, pp 41–54
Denissen JJA, Neumann L, van Zalk M (2010) How the Internet is changing the implementation of traditional research methods, people’s daily lives, and the way in which developmental scientists conduct research. Int J Behav Dev 34:564–575
Deutskens E, de Ruyter K, Wetzels M, Oosterveld P (2004) Response rate and response quality of Internet-based surveys: an experimental study. Mark Lett 15:21–36
Dillman DA (1978) Mail and telephone surveys. The total design method. Wiley, New York
Dillman DA (2000) Mail and Internet surveys. The tailored design method, 2nd edn. Wiley, New York
Dillman DA, Smyth JD, Christian LM (2009) Internet, mail, and mixed-mode surveys. The tailored design method, 3rd edn. Wiley, Hoboken
Doerflinger P, Kopec JA, Liang MH, Esdaile JM (2010) The effect of cash lottery on response rates to an online health survey among members of the Canadian Association of Retired Persons: a randomized experiment. Can J Public Health 101:251–254
Dykema J, Stevenson J, Day B, Sellers SL, Bonham VL (2011) Effects of incentives and prenotification on response rates and costs in a national Web survey of physicians. Eval Health Prof 34:434–447
Dykema J, Stevenson J, Klein L, Kim Y, Day B (2012) Effects of e-mailed versus mailed invitations and incentives on response rates, data quality, and costs in a Web survey of university faculty. Soc Sci Comput Rev 31:359–370
Eagly AH, Chaiken S (1984) Cognitive theories of persuasion. Adv Exp Soc Psychol 17:267–296
Edwards P, Roberts I, Clarke M, DiGuiseppi C, Partap S, Wentz R, Kwan I (2002) Increasing response rates to postal questionnaires: systematic review. Brit Med J 324(7347):1183–1191
Edwards P, Roberts I, Clarke M, DiGuiseppi C, Wentz R, Kwan I, Cooper R, Felix LM, Pratap S (2009) Methods to increase response rates to postal and electronic questionnaires. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 3
ESOMAR (2013) Global market research 2013. ESOMAR, Amsterdam
Esser H (1986) Über die Teilnahme an Befragungen. ZUMA Nachr 18:38–47
Evans JR, Mathur A (2005) The value of online surveys. Internet Res 15:195–219
Fan W, Yan Z (2010) Factors affecting response rates of the Web survey: a systematic review. Comput Hum Behav 26:132–139
Fang J, Shao P, Lan G (2009) Effects of innovativeness and trust on Web survey participation. Comput Hum Behav 25:144–152
Fang J, Wen C, Pavur R (2012) Participation willingness in Web surveys: exploring effect of sponsoring corporation’s and survey provider’s reputation. Cyberpsychol Behav Soc Netw 15:195–199
Faught KS, Green KW Jr, Whitten D (2004) Doing survey research on the Internet: yes, timing does matter. J Comput Inf Syst 44:26–34
Felix LM, Burchett HE, Edwards PJ (2011) Factorial trial found mixed evidence of effects of pre-notification and pleading on response to Web-based survey. J Clin Epidemiol 64:531–536
Festinger L (1954) A theory of social comparison processes. Hum Relat 7:117–140
Festinger L (1957) A theory of cognitive dissonance. Stanford University Press, Stanford. First published by Row, Peterson and Company. Reissued 1970
Fishbein M, Ajzen I (1975) Belief, attitude, intention, and behavior. An introduction to theory and research. Addison Wesley, Reading
Fox RJ, Crask MR, Kim J (1988) Mail survey response rates. A meta-analysis of selected techniques for inducing response. Public Opin Q 52:467–491
Furse DH, Stewart DW (1984) Manipulating dissonance to improve mail survey response. Psychol Mark 1:79–94
Gajic A, Cameron D, Hurley J (2012) The cost-effectiveness of cash versus lottery incentives for a web-based, stated-preference community survey. Eur J Health Econ 13:789–799
Galesic M (2006) Dropouts on the Web: effects of interest and burden experienced during an online survey. J Off Stat 22:313–328
Galesic M, Bosnjak M (2009) Effects of questionnaire length on participation and indicators of response quality in a Web survey. Public Opin Q 73:349–360
Ganassali S (2008) The influence of the design of Web survey questionnaires on the quality of response. Surv Res Method 2:21–33
Göritz AS (2004a) Recruitment for online access panels. Int J Mark Res 46:411–425
Göritz AS (2004b) The impact of material incentives on response quantity, response quality, sample composition, survey outcome, and cost in online access panels. Int J Mark Res 46:327–345
Göritz AS (2005) Contingent versus unconditional incentives in www-studies. Metodološki zvezki. Adv Methodol Stat 2:1–14
Göritz AS (2006a) Incentives in Web studies: methodological issues and a review. Int J Internet Sci 1:58–70
Göritz AS (2006b) Cash lotteries as incentives in online panels. Soc Sci Comput Rev 24:445–459
Göritz AS (2008) The long-term effect of material incentives on participation in online panels. Field Methods 20:211–225
Göritz AS (2014) Determinants of the starting rate and the completion rate in online panel studies. In: Callegaro M, Baker R, Bethlehem J, Göritz AS, Krosnick JA, Lavrakas PJ (eds) Online panel research: a data quality perspective. Wiley, Chichester, pp 154–170
Göritz AS, Crutzen R (2012) Reminders in Web-based data collection: increasing response at the price of retention? Am J Eval 33:240–250
Göritz AS, Luthe SC (2013a) Lotteries and study results in market research online panels. Int J Mark Res 55:611–626
Göritz AS, Luthe SC (2013b) Effects of lotteries on response behavior in online panels. Field Methods 25:219–237
Göritz AS, Luthe SC (2013c) How do lotteries and study results influence response behavior in online panels. Soc Sci Comput Rev 31:371–385
Göritz AS, Stieger S (2008) The high-hurdle technique put to the test: failure to find evidence that increased loading times enhance data quality in Web-based studies. Behav Res Methods 40:322–327
Göritz AS, Stieger S (2009) The impact of the field time on response, retention and response completeness in list-based Web surveys. Int J Hum Comput St 67:342–348
Göritz AS, Wolff HG (2007) Lotteries as incentives in longitudinal Web studies. Soc Sci Comput Rev 25:99–110
Göritz AS, Wolff HG, Goldstein DG (2008) Individual payments as a longer-term incentive in online panels. Behav Res Methods 40:1144–1149
Gouldner AW (1960) The norm of reciprocity: a preliminary statement. Am Sociol Rev 25:161–178
Greif V, Batinic B (2007) Die Bedeutung des Einladungsschreibens für die Rücklaufquote in Online-Befragungen. Jahrb Absatz- Verbrauchsforsch 53:162–177
Groves RM (2006) Nonresponse rates and nonresponse bias in household surveys. Public Opin Q 70:664–675
Groves RM, Cialdini RB, Couper M (1992) Understanding the decision to participate in a survey. Public Opin Q 56:475–495
Groves RM, Singer E, Corning A (2000) Leverage-salience theory of survey participation. Description and an illustration. Public Opin Q 64:299–308
Groves RM, Presser S, Dipko S (2004) The role of topic interest in survey participation decisions. Public Opin Q 68:2–31
Groves RM, Floyd FJ Jr, Couper MP, Lepowski JM, Singer E, Tourangeau R (2009) Survey methodology. Wiley-Interscience, Hoboken
Guéguen N (2003) Help on the Web: the effect of the same first name between the sender and the receptor in a request made by e-mail. Psychol Rec 53:459–466
Guéguen N, Jacob C (2002a) Social presence reinforcement and coputer-mediated communication: the effect of the solicitor’s photography on compliance to a survey request made by e-mail. Cyberpsychol Behav 5:139–142
Guéguen N, Jacob C (2002b) Soliciation by e-mail and solicitor’s status: a field study of social influence on the Web. Cyberpsychol Behav 5:377–383
Guéguen N, Pichot N, Le Dreff G (2005) Similarity and helping on the Web: the impact of the convergence of surnames between a solicitor and a subject in a request made by e-mail. J Appl Soc Psychol 35:423–429
Hackler JC, Bourgette P (1973) Dollars, dissonance and survey returns. Public Opin Q 37:276–281
Han V, Albaum G, Wiley JB, Thirkell P (2009) Applying theory to structure respondents’ stated motivations for participating in web surveys. Qual Mark Res Int J 12:428–442
Hansen RA, Robinson LM (1980) Testing the effectiveness of alternative foot-in-the-door manipulations. J Mark Res 17:359–364
Hart AM, Brennan CW, Sym D, Larson E (2009) The impact of personalized prenotification on response rates to an electronic survey. West J Nurs Res 31:17–23
Haunberger S (2011) Explaining unit nonresponse in online panel surveys: an application of the extended theory of planned behavior. J Appl Soc Psychol 41:2999–3025
Havitz ME, Howard DR (1995) How enduring is enduring involvement? A seasonal examination of three recreational activities. J Consum Psychol 4:255–276
Healy B, Macpherson T, Kuijten B (2005) An empirical evaluation of three Web survey design principles. Mark Bull 16:1–9
Helgeson JG, Voss KV, Terpening WD (2002) Determinants of mail-survey response: survey design factors and respondent factors. Psychol Mark 19:303–328
Heerwegh D (2005) Effects of personal salutation in e-mail invitations to participate in a Web survey. Public Opin Q 69:588–598
Heerwegh D (2006) An investigation of the effect of lotteries on Web survey response rates. Field Methods 18:205–220
Heerwegh D, Loosveldt G (2002) Web surveys. The effect of controlling survey access using PIN numbers. Soc Sci Comput Rev 20:10–21
Heerwegh D, Loosveldt G (2003) An evaluation of the semiautomatic login procedure to control Web surveys access. Soc Sci Comput Rev 21:223–234
Heerwegh D, Loosveldt G (2006) An experimental study on the effects of personalization, survey length statements, progress indicators, and survey sponsor logos in Web surveys. J Off Stat 22:191–210
Heerwegh D, Loosveldt G (2007) Personalizing e-mail contacts: its influence on Web survey response rate and social desirability response bias. Int J Public Opin Res 19:258–268
Heerwegh D, Vanhove T, Matthijs K, Loosveldt G (2005) The effect of personalization on response rates and data quality in Web surveys. Int J Soc Res Meth 8:85–99
Joinson AN, Reips UD (2007) Personalized salutation, power of sender and response rates to Web-based surveys. Comput Hum Behav 23:1372–1383
Joinson AN, Woodley A, Reips UD (2007) Personalization, authentication and self-disclosure in self-administered Internet surveys. Comput Hum Behav 23:275–285
Kanuk L, Berenson C (1975) Mail surveys and response rates: a literature review. J Mark Res 12:440–453
Kaplowitz MD, Hadlock TD, Levine R (2004) A comparison of Web and mail survey response rates. Public Opin Q 68:94–101
Kaplowitz MD, Lupi F, Couper MP, Thorp L (2012) The effect of invitation design on Web survey response rates. Soc Sci Comput Rev 30:339–349
Kehoe CM, Pitkow JE (1996) Surveying the territory: GVU’s five www user surveys. World Wide Web J 1:77–84
Kent R, Brandal H (2003) Improving e-mail response in a permission marketing context. Int J Mark Res 45:489–503
Keusch F (2012) Increasing response rates in list-based Web survey samples. Soc Sci Comput Rev 30:380–388
Keusch F (2013) The role of topic interest and topic salience in online panel Web surveys. Int J Mark Res 55:59–80
Keusch F, Batinic B, Mayerhofer W (2014) Motives for joining nonprobability online panels and their association with participation behavior. In: Callegaro M, Baker R, Bethlehem J, Göritz AS, Krosnick JA, Lavrakas PJ (eds) Online panel research: a data quality perspective. Wiley, Chichester, pp 171–191
Klofstad CA, Boulianne S, Basson D (2008) Matching the message to the medium. Results from an experiment on Internet survey email contacts. Soc Sci Comput Rev 26:498–509
Kroeber-Riel W, Esch FR (2004) Strategie und Technik der Werbung. Verhaltenswissenschaftliche Ansätze, 6th edn. Kohlhammer, Stuttgart
Laguilles JS, Williams EA, Saunders DB (2011) Can lottery incentives boost Web survey response rates? Findings from four experiments. Res High Educ 52:537–533
LaRose R, Tsai H-YS (2014) Completion rates and non-response error in online surveys: comparing sweepstakes and pre-paid cash incentives in studies of online behavior. Comput Hum Behav 34:110–119
Lozar Manfreda K, Vehovar V (2002) Survey design features influencing response rates in Web surveys. Paper presented at the international conference on improving survey, August 25–28, 2002. Copenhagen, Denmark
Lozar Manfreda K, Bosnjak M, Berzelak J, Haas I, Vehovar V (2008) Web surveys versus other survey modes. A meta-analysis comparing response rates. Int J Mark Res 50:79–114
Mahon-Haft TA, Dillman DA (2010) Does visual appeal matter? Effects of Web survey aesthetics on survey quality. Surv Res Method 4:43–59
Marcus B, Schütz A (2005) Who are the people reluctant to participate in research? Personality correlates of four different types of nonresponse as inferred from self- and observer ratings. J Personal 73:959–984
Marcus B, Bosnjak M, Lindner S, Pilischenko S, Schütz A (2007) Compensating for low topic interest and long surveys. A field experiment on nonresponse in Web surveys. Soc Sci Comput Rev 25:372–383
Matzat U, Snijders C, van der Horst W (2009) Effects of different types of progress indicators on drop-out rates in Web surveys. Soc Psychol 40:43–52
Mavletova A, Deviatko I, Maloshonok N (2014) Invitation design elements in Web surveys—can one ignore interactions? Bull Sociol Methodol 123:68–79
McCambridge J, Kalaitzaki E, White IR, Khadjesari Z, Murray E, Linke S, Thompson SG, Godfrey C, Wallace P (2011) Impact of length or relevance of questionnaires on attrition in online trials: randomized controlled trial. J Med Internet Res 13(4):e96
McCree-Hale R, De La Cruz NG, Montgomery AE (2010) Using downloadable songs from Apple iTunes as novel incentive for college students participating in a Web-based follow-up survey. Sci Health Promot 25:119–121
Messer BL, Dillman DA (2011) Surveying the general public over the Internet using address-based sampling and mail contact procedures. Public Opin Q 75:429–457
Miksza P, Roeder M, Biggs D (2010) Surveying Colorado band directors’ opinions of skills and characteristics important to successful music teaching. J Res Music Educ 57:364–381
Milgram S (1974) Obedience to authority: an experimental view. Harper & Row, New York
Millar MM, Dillman DA (2011) Improving response to Web and mixed-mode surveys. Public Opin Q 75:249–269
Muncy JA, Hunt SD (1984) Consumer involvement: definitional issues and research directions. Adv Consum Res 11:193–196
O’Neil KM, Penrod SD (2001) Methodological variables in Web-based research that may affect results: sample type, monetary incentives, and personal information. Behav Res Methods Instrum Comput 33:226–233
O’Neil KM, Penrod SD, Bornstein BH (2003) Web-based research: methodological variables’ effects on dropout and sample characteristics. Behav Res Methods Instrum Comput 35:217–226
Pan B, Woodside AG, Meng F (2013) How contextual cues impact response and conversion rates of online surveys. J Travel Res 53:58–68
Parsons NL, Manierre MJ (2014) Investigating the relationship among prepaid token incentives, response rates, and nonresponse bias in a web survey. Field Methods 26:191–204
Patrick ME, Singer E, Boyd CJ, Cranford JA, McCabe SE (2013) Incentives for college student participation in web-based substance use survey. Addict Behav 38:1710–1714
Petrova PK, Cialdini RB, Sills SJ (2007) Consistency-based compliance across cultures. J Exp Soc Psychol 43:104–111
Petty RE, Cacioppo JT (1986) Communication and persuasion: central and peripheral routes to attitude change. Springer, Berlin
Peytchev A (2009) Survey breakoff. Public Opin Q 73:74–97
Peytchev A (2011) Breakoff and unit nonresponse across Web surveys. J Off Stat 27:33–47
Peytchev A, Couper MP, McCabe SE, Crawford SD (2006) Web survey design. Paging versus scrolling. Public Opin Q 70:596–607
Pitkow JE, Recker MM (1994) Results from the first world-wide Web user survey. J Comput Netw ISDN Syst 27:243–254
Porter SR, Whitcomb ME (2003a) The impact of lottery incentives on student survey response rates. Res High Educ 44:389–407
Porter SR, Whitcomb ME (2003b) The impact of contact type on Web survey response rates. Public Opin Q 67:579–588
Porter SR, Whitcomb ME (2004) Understanding the effect of prizes on response rates. New Dir Inst Res 212:51–62
Porter SR, Whitcomb ME (2005a) E-mail subject lines and their effect on Web survey viewing and response. Soc Sci Comput Rev 23:380–387
Porter SR, Whitcomb ME (2005b) Non-response in student surveys: the role of demographics, engagement and personality. Res High Educ 46:127–152
Porter SR, Whitcomb ME (2007) Mixed-mode contacts in Web surveys. Paper is not necessarily better. Public Opin Q 71:635–648
Porter SR, Whitcomb ME, Weitzer WH (2004) Multiple surveys of students and survey fatigue. New Dir Inst Res 212:63–73
Postoaca A (2006) The anonymous elect. Market research through online access panels. Springer, Berlin
Reed JG, Baxter PM (1994) Using reference databases. In: Cooper H, Hedges LV (eds) The handbook of research synthesis. Russell Sage Foundation, New York, pp 57–70
Reingen H, Kernan JB (1977) Compliance with an interview request: a foot-in-the-door, self-perception interpretation. J Mark Res 14:365–369
Rothshild ML (1984) Perspectives on involvement: current problems and future directions. Adv Consum Res 11:216–217
Sánchez-Fernández J, Munoz-Leiva F, Montoro-Ríos FJ, Ibánez-Zapata JÁ (2010) An analysis of the effect of pre-incentives and post-incentives based on draws on response to Web surveys. Qual Quant 44:357–373
Sánchez-Fernández J, Munoz-Leiva F, Montoro-Ríos FJ (2012) Improving retention rate and response quality in Web-based surveys. Comput Hum Behav 28:507–514
Sauermann H, Roach M (2013) Increasing Web survey response rates in innovation research: an experimental study of static and dynamic contact design features. Res Policy 42:273–286
Sax LJ, Gilmartin SK, Bryant AN (2003) Assessing response rates and nonresponse bias in Web and paper surveys. Res High Educ 44:409–432
Schillewaert N, Meulemeester P (2005) Comparing response distributions of offline and online data collection methods. Int J Mark Res 47:163–178
Schillewaert N, Langerak F, Duhamel T (1998) Non-probability sampling for WWW surveys: a comparison of methods. J Mark Res Soc 40:307–322
Shih TH, Fan X (2007) Response rates and mode preferences in Web-mail mixed-mode surveys: a meta-analysis. Int J Internet Sci 2:59–82
Shih TH, Fan X (2008) Comparing response rates from Web and mail surveys: a meta-analysis. Field Methods 20:249–271
Singer E (2011) Toward a benefit-cost theory of survey participation: evidence, further tests, and implications. J Off Stat 27:379–392
Singer E, Ye C (2013) The use and effects of incentives in surveys. Ann Am Acad Polit Soc Sci 645:112–141
Steeth CG (1981) Trends in nonresponse rates 1952–1979. Public Opin Q 45:40–57
Stieger S, Göritz AS, Voracek M (2011) Handle with care: the impact of using Java applets in Web-based studies on dropout and sample composition. Cyberpsychol Behav Soc Netw 14:327–330
Stingelbauer B, Gnambs T, Gamsäger M (2011) The interactive effects of motivations and trust in anonymity on adolescents’ enduring participation in Web-based social science research: a longitudinal behavior analysis. Int J Internet Res 6:29–43
Sutherland MA, Amar AF, Laughon K (2013) Who send the email? Using electronic surveys in violence research. West J Emerg Med 14:363–369
Svensson M, Svensson T, Hansen AW, Lagerros YT (2012) The effect of reminders in a Web-based intervention study. Eur J Epidemiol 27:333–340
Thibaut JW, Kelly HH (1959) The social psychology of groups, 5th pr 1967. Wiley, New York
Tourangeau R (2004) Survey research and social change. Annu Rev Psychol 55:775–801
Tourangeau R, Groves RM, Kennedy C, Yan T (2009) The presentation of a Web survey, nonresponse and measurement error among members of Web panels. J Off Stat 25:299–321
Tuten TL (1997) Getting a foot in the electronic door: understanding why people read or delete electronic mail. ZUMA-Arbeitsbericht Nr 97/08. ZUMA, Mannheim
Tuten TL, Bosnjak M, Bandilla W (2000) Banner-advertised Web surveys. Mark Res 11(4):16–21
Tuten TL, Galesic M, Bosnjak M (2004) Effects of immediate versus delayed notification of prize draw results on response behavior in Web surveys. Soc Sci Comput Rev 22:377–384
Trouteaud AR (2004) How you ask counts: a test of Internet-related components of response rates to Web-based surveys. Soc Sci Comput Rev 22:385–392
Tybout AM, Yalch RF (1980) The effect of experience: a matter of salience? J Consum Res 6:406–413
Villar A, Callegaro M, Yang Y (2013) Where am I? A meta-analysis of experiments on the effects of progress indicators for Web surveys. Soc Sci Comput Rev 31:744–762
Waltson JT, Lissitz RW, Rudner LM (2006) The influence of Web-based questionnaire presentation variations on survey cooperation and perceptions of survey quality. J Off Stat 22:271–291
Whitcomb ME, Porter SR (2004) E-mail contacts. A test of complex graphical design in survey research. Soc Sci Comput Rev 22:370–376
Wiley JB, Han V, Albaum G, Thirkell P (2009) Selecting techniques for use in an Internet survey. Asian Pac J Mark Logist 21:455–474
Wilson PM, Petticrew M, Calnan M, Nazareth I (2010) Effects of a financial incentive on health researchers’ responses to an online survey: a randomized controlled trial. J Med Internet Res 12(2):e13
Yan T, Conrad FG, Tourangeau R, Couper MP (2011) Should I stay or should I go: the effect of progress feedback, promised task duration, and length of questionnaire on completing Web surveys. Int J Public Opin Res 23:131–147
Yarger JB, James TA, Ashikaga T, Hayanga AJ, Takyi V, Lum Y, Kaiser H, Mammen J (2013) Characteristics in response rates for surveys administered to surgery residents. Surg 154:38–45
Yu J, Cooper H (1983) A quantitative review of research design effects on response rates to questionnaires. J Mark Res 20:36–44
Ziegenfuss JY, Niederhauser BD, Kallmes D, Beebe TJ (2013) An assessment of incentive versus survey length trade-offs in a web survey of radiologists. J Med Internet Res 15:e49
Zillman D, Schmitz A, Skopek J, Blossfeld H-P (2014) Survey topic and unit nonresponse. Evidence from an online survey on mating. Qual Quant 48:2069–2088
Metadata
Title
Why do people participate in Web surveys? Applying survey participation theory to Internet survey data collection
Author
Florian Keusch
Publication date
01-06-2015
Publisher
Springer Berlin Heidelberg
Published in
Management Review Quarterly / Issue 3/2015
Print ISSN: 2198-1620
Electronic ISSN: 2198-1639
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11301-014-0111-y