Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

Click here for more information on Research and Evaluation in Education and Psychology, 3e

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
Educational and Psychological Measurement
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow References
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Right arrow Citing Articles via Scopus
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Rucker, M.
Right arrow Articles by Vanderlip, N.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati   Add to Twitter  
What's this?

Personalization of Mail Surveys: Too Much of a Good Thing?

M. Rucker

Division of Textiles and Clothing University of California, Davis

R. Hughes

Division of Textiles and Clothing University of California, Davis

R. Thompson

Division of Textiles and Clothing University of California, Davis

A. Harrison

Department of Psychology University of California, Davis

N. Vanderlip

Department of Psychology University of California, Davis

Cover letters with and without pictures of the researcher were included with questionnaires to test the effects of this type of personalization on responses to a mail survey. In addition, the researcher's attire, title, and affiliation were varied across different forms of the cover letter to evaluate the effects of status, role-clothing consistency, and similarity to the perceiver on perceiver's willingness to return the survey form. The questionnaires were mailed to a sample of 384 university alumni. The total number of returned questionnaires, after the initial mailing and two personalized follow-ups, were lower in the researcher-pictured cover letter conditions than in the control conditions. This finding offers some support for the hypothesis that repeated use of personalized mailings may have a negative effect on response rate. Response latencies suggest that within the researcher-pictured conditions, inconsistency of cues may also inhibit questionnaire returns.

Educational and Psychological Measurement, Vol. 44, No. 4, 893-905 (1984)
DOI: 10.1177/0013164484444011
Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Complore Complore   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 JRSMHome page
M. Clarke, L. Clarke, and T. Clarke
Yes Sir, no Sir, not much difference Sir
J R Soc Med, December 1, 2007; 100(12): 571 - 572.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Eval Health ProfHome page
C. Gore-Felton, C. Koopman, E. Bridges, C. Thoresen, and D. Spiegel
An Example of Maximizing Survey Return Rates: Methodological Issues for Health Professionals
Eval Health Prof, June 1, 2002; 25(2): 152 - 168.
[Abstract] [PDF]