Web Based Surey

8/6/2019 Web Based Surey

1/6

A C O M P A R I S O N O F M A I L , F A X , A N D W E B - B A S E D S U R V E Y M E T H O D SC i h a n C o b a n o g l u , B i l l W a r d e , Pa tr i c k J . M o r e o , O k l a h o m a S ta te U n i v e r s i ty

C i h a n C o b a n o g l u , O S U , S c h o o l o f H o te l a n d R e s ta u r a n t A d m i n i s t r a t io n , S t i l lw a te r , O K 7 4 0 7 8K E Y W O R D S : R e s p o n s e R a te s , R e s p o n s e P a tt e rn s ,D a ta C o n s i s t e n c yA B S T R A C T :

This s tudy compared mai l , f ax , and web-basedsurveys in a univers i ty se t t ing for response speed,response ra te , and cos ts . The survey was d is t r ibuted to300 randomly chosen hospi ta l i ty professors f rom theCounc i l on Hote l , Res taurant , and Ins t i tu t iona lEduca t ion (CHRIE) members l i s ted in theorgan iza t ion ' s onl ine d i rec tory as of Apr i l 2000. I t wasfound tha t the fas tes t method was fax wi th an averageof 4 .0 days to respond fo l lowed by web surveys wi th5.97 days to respond. The s lowest method was mai lsurveys wi th 16 .46 days to respond. The response ra tewas 26.27% for mai l , 17 .0% for fax , and 44.21% forweb. An L SD type z - tes t shows s igni f icant d i f fe rencesbe tween mai l and e -mai l /web and be tween fax and e -mai l /web, but no s igni f icant d i f fe rence be tween mai land fax.I N T R O D U C T I O N

As the number of In te rne t use rs in the wor lddoubles every year , r eaching 100 mil l ion in 1998,researchers are using Internet tools such as e-mail andweb-based surveys more of ten . According to Di l lman(1999) , the most s igni f icant advances in the surveym e thodo logy du r ing the twe n t i e th c e n tu r y we r e thein t roduc t ion o f random sampl ing in the 1940s andte lephone in te rviewing in the 1970s . Researchers todayare wi tness ing s imi la r advances in the f ie ld of surveym e tho do logy wi th t he i n t r oduc tion o f t e c hno logy- ba se dsurveys such as the In te rne t , voice recogni t ion sys tems,and e lec t ronic fax surveys .

Not much research has been focus ing onte c hno logy- ba se d su r ve y m e thodo log ie s be c a use the yhave only been in t roduced in the las t decade . Theana lys is o f pas t research o n the use o f the In te rne t as asu r ve y m e thodo logy shows a w ide va r i a t i on inresponse ra tes and speed of response for In te rne t -basedsurveys (Sheehan & McM il lan , 1999) . S ince thenumber of s tudies us ing these methodologies i s l imi tedand the popula t ions and research topics they use a redifferent, there is no clear idea of the effects of theInte rne t -based surveys . Th ere a re not many s tudies tha tc om pa r e f ax m e thodo logy to o the r m e thodo log ie s .

The p urpose of th is s tudy is to comp are mai l , f ax ,and web-based surveys in a univers i ty se t t ing forresponse speed, response ra te, and cos ts .

R E V I E W O F L I T E R A T U R EDi l lm a n ' s To ta l De s ign M e thod ( TDM ) ( 1978)

b r ough t a ne w pe rspe c tive a nd m e thod to m a i l a ndte lephone surveys . TDM sugges ted a one s ize - f i t s -a l lapproach in which the methods of implement ing mai land te lephone surveys remained the same for manydif fe rent popula t ions or condi t ions . Di l lman (1999)c la imed tha t th is was the b igges t shor tcoming of TDM.The o r ig ina l TDM e m ploye d num e r ous in t e r c onne c tedprocedures for conduc t ing mai l and te lephone surveystha t resul ted h igh response ra tes . Soc ia l exchange wasmaxim ized for both the respondents and the researcher .The perce ived rewards were inc reased whi le perce ivedcosts were decreased for the respondents . TDM didnot employ more than one method to col lec t surveyda ta. Researchers eventua l ly s ta r ted to use mixed -mod esurveys tha t employed te lephone , mai l , f ax , and e -mai lmethods a l toge ther or in d i f fe rent combina t ions .(Dillman & Yarnai, 1988; Beck, 1996; Dillman, 1999).Research on mixed-mode surveys has sugges ted tha temploying more than one method for col lec t ing surveyda ta i s acceptable and usua l ly y ie lds a h igher responsera te . The main reason why one may want to use amixed-mode method for surveys i s tha t deve lopingtechnologies may not be ava i lable to a l l members of apopula t ion , the re fore , e l imina t ing the chance for be ingse lec ted . With the de ve lopm ent o f the In te rne t , thebigges t concern i s us ing e -mai l or web-b ased surveys i stha t not a ll members of the popula t ion have access to e-mai l and to the Wor ld Wide Web (Web) (Di l lman,1999).

Di l lman (1999) c la imed tha t the leve l oftechnology reached made i t imposs ib le for mostpopula t ions to be reached by only one mode . Withineach group, the re a re people who can be pr imar i lyreached by mail , te lephone, fax, personal visit , or e-mai l r a ther than severa l or a l l of the method s .

Th e m a jo r po te n t ia l p r ob le m wi th u s ing m ixe d -mode surveys for the same popula t ion is de f ined as themeasurement d i f fe rences be tween modes (de Leeuw,1992; Schwarz , Hipple r & Noel le -Neumann, 1992;Di l lman, 1999) . This d i f fe rence may even resul t indi f fe rent ana ly t ica l conc lus ions and recommendat ions .Di l lman (1999) sugges ted tha t the re a re four mainreasons for d i f fe rences be tween di f fe rent modes: soc ia ldesirabili ty, acquiescence, question order effects, andpr imary/ recency e f fec ts . This potent ia l problem may bem in im iz e d by a pp ly ing a un im oda l de s ign wh ic hfocuses on wr i t ing and present ing ques t ions in a waytha t assures rece ip t by respondents of a common

405


2/6

m en t a l s t i m u l u s . M o s t r e s ea r ch o n m i x ed - m o d esurveys has focused on d i f f erences between mai l andte lephone, mai l and per sonal in terv iew, and te lephoneand per sonal in terv iew. There i s li t tl e r esearch on them eas u r em en t d i f f e r en ces b e t w een m a i l , f ax , an din ternet -based su rveys . D i f f eren t f rom mix ed-m oded es i g n s t h a t em p l o y t e l ep h o n e an d m a i l m e t h o d s o n l y ,the su rvey data ob ta ined by us ing mai l , f ax andin ternet -based su rveys may no t be s ta t i s t i ca l lyd i f f eren t , p rov ided tha t the su rveys do no t depend onthe p r in t ing qual i ty , complex g raphs , and co lo r .M A I L , FA X , A N D W E B - B A S E D S U R V E Y S

Table I shows the speci f ica t ions o f mai l , f ax , andweb-based surveys . The coverage fo r mai l su rveyscompared to f ax and web-based surveys i s s ign i f ican t lyh i g h e r b ecau s e m em b e r s o f a ll p o p u la t i on s h av e s o m ek i n d o f ad d r e s s w h i l e n o t ev e r y p o p u l a t io n m em b er h asa f ax mach ine and /or e-mai l /web access . Non-del iverab le su rveys in mai l and f ax methods arere la t ive ly less than web-based surveys because peop lechange the i r e -mai l addresses and the In ternet Serv iceProv ider s ( ISP) much more f r equen t ly than the i r pos ta laddresses (Zatz , 2000) . Wi th a pos ta l address change, afo rward ing address may be val id fo r 12 months . Oncean e-mai l i s changed , there i s usual ly no way tofo rward e-mai l messages tha t were sen t to an o ld e-mai l address . Research has shown that inc lus ion o fcash and non-cash incen t ives can increase r esponsera tes s ign i f ican t ly (Shank , Dar r , & W erner , 1990; Hare ,Pr ice , F lynn , & King , 1998 ; D i l lman , 1999) . Cash andnon-cash incen t ives can be eas i ly inc luded in to mai lsurveys, but i t is impossible to include tangibleincen t ives in to f ax and web-based surveys . D icksonand Maclach lan (1996) sugges ted tha t coupons migh tbe inc luded wi th f ax su rveys as an incen t ive . The sameidea can be implemented in to the web-based surveys .Pre-addressed , p re- s tamped envelopes can be inc ludedwi th mai l su rveys whi le a to l l f r ee 800 r e tu rn f axnumber can be p rov ided fo r f ax r esponden ts to pay fo rthe return costs . In web-based surveys, there is novar iab le cos t to the r esponden t a l though there arecons iderab le f ixed cos t s when es tab l i sh ing andmain ta in ing In ternet and e-mai l access . Co lor , qual i tyimage and complex g raphs can be used in mai l andweb-based surveys . Audio , v ideo and an imatedgraph ics can be inc luded in web-based surveys(Bach man n , E l f r ink , Vazzana, 2000) . Mai l su rveys areeasy to cons t ruct bu t copy ing , l abel ing , fo ld ing ,s tu f f ing envelopes , and p repar ing the r e tu rn envelopes(wi th s tamps o r bus iness r ep ly ) takes cons iderab lylabor and f inancia l r esources . Fax surveys , i f conductedw i t h a m o d em cap ab l e co m p u t e r an d m a i l m er g eprogram such as Microsof t Word , can be p repared inminu tes and the t r ansmiss ion o f f axes can be even done

au tomat ica l ly . I f an e lec t ron ic f ax ma ch ine such asefax .com is used fo r r e tu rns , the paper consumpt ionbecomes zero s ince the f axes sen t to the efax numberco m es t o t h e r e s ea r ch e r a s an em a i l a t t ach m en t(Efax .com, 2000) . The var iab le cos t fo r t r ansmi t t ingthe su rvey depends on the long d is tance car r ier andranges f rom f ive cen ts to twen ty- f ive cen ts per minu te .Wi th web-based surveys , the in i t i a l se tup takes t imebut the t r ansmiss ion o f thousands o f su rveys canl i te r a lly be done in minu tes . Resp onden ts usual lyco m p l e t e an d t r an s m i t th e an s w er s i m m ed i a t e l y w h i l et h ey h av e t h e e - m a i l o p en o n t h e i r co m p u t e r an d caneas i ly r e t r ieve it . I n add i t ion , web-based su rveys arecoded au tomat ica l ly as r esponden ts en ter the i r answersw h i l e m a i l an d f ax s u r v ey s h av e t o b e co d ed m an u a l l y .

A rev iew of the l i te r a tu re sugges t s tha t a ma jor i tyo f s u r v ey m e t h o d o l o g y r e s ea r ch e r s f o cu s o n t h ed i f f e r en ces b e t w een m a i l an d e - m a i l s u r v ey s ( Sh eeh an& McMil lan , 1999) . However , there i s l i t t l e r esearchthat compared mai l , f ax , and in ternet -based su rveys .

M E T H O D O L O G YA t ech n o l o g i ca l l y ad v an ced p o p u l a t i o n w as

chosen in o rder to be t ter exp lore the ef f ec t ivenessi s sues . The su rvey was d i s t r ibu ted to 300 r andomlychosen hosp i ta l i ty p ro fessor s f rom the CHRIE l i s ted inthe on l ine d i r ec to ry on Apr i l 2000 . The sam ple o f 300professor s was r andomly se lec ted f rom the 653 en t r iesthat r emained af ter r emoving 153 en t r ies tha t d id no tinc lude an e-mai l address . One hundred p rofessor swere r and omly a ss igned to each o f the th reed is t r ibu t ion method g roups : mai l , f ax , and web .

In o rder to encourage r esponse , the su rvey top iccovered an in teres t ing top ic to them: hosp i ta l i tyeducat ion . A cover le t te r was per sonal ly addressed toeach p rofessor in t roducing the su rvey . Each p rofessorreceived the same in t roduct ion wi th speci f icins t ruct ions on how to r espond us ing the appropr ia tem e t h o d .

Deta i led r ecords o f each p rocedura l s tep werekep t in o rder to f ac i l i t a te analys i s inc lud ing the t imeinvo lved in develop ing each type o f su rvey , the datesthe messages were sen t , the pos tmarked r e tu rn dates ,m e t h o d each r e s p o n d en t u s ed t o r e s p o n d , an d t i m erequ i r ed to code the r esponses . Cos ts were a l sorecorded .M a n y o f t h e m an u a l s t ep s f or t h e m a i l g r o u p w er esaved in word p rocess ing f i l es and r e-used fo r the f axan d w eb - b as ed s u r v ey s . T h e co m m o n co v e r l e t t e r f o rt h e s u r v ey w as m o d i f i ed f o r each g r o u p b y ch an g i n gthe r esponse-op t ion addresses and the bas icins t ruct ions on how to r e tu rn the su rvey . For the mai lg roup , per sonal ized cover le t te r s were p r in ted onun iver s i ty le t te rhead us ing Microsof t Word (1997)fo lded wi th a p r in ted su rvey and bus iness r ep ly

406


3/6

enve lope . The f axed ve r s ion inc luded a pe r sona l izedcove r le t te r wi th a un ive r s i ty le t te rhead logo embeddedin to the sof tware and a su rvey . Mic rosof t Word (1997)w i t h M i c r o s o f t Fa x ( 1 9 9 5 ) a n d M i c r o s o f t E x c h a n g e(1995) were used to ma i l merge and to f ax the surveys .The name , address , and f ax numbers wereau toma t ica l ly inse r ted in to the le t te r and f axed by thecompute r . Mic rosof t Exchange (1997) p rov ides ade ta i led r ecord o f the t r ansmiss ions such a s t ime faxedand the r ea son fo r a f ax no t go ing th rough . Thes o f tw a r e w a s p r o g r a m m e d t o r e p e a t t h e f a x th r e e t im e sshould a p rob lem occur be fore o r dur ing thetransmission such as busy signal , l ine cuts , e tc .Transmiss ion r ecords were kep t fo r fu r the r ana lys i s .For the web-based survey , an e -ma i l message wassen t to the p rofe ssor s a long wi th a cove r le t te r and thewebs i te address (URL) . The r e spondents werein formed tha t they cou ld r eques t a pape r copy of thesurvey should they have p rob lem wi th access ing thesurvey on l ine . A un ique webs i te address was c rea tedfor each r e spondent wi th the he lp o f a commonga teway in te r f ace p ro toco l (CGI) . Thus , the r e sponseswere t r acked and the poss ib i l i ty e l imina ted o f are sponse f rom a non-sample source . The In te rne t

pro toco l numbers ( IP) were ob ta ined a long wi th thet ime and da te the survey was comple ted by there spondent . Respon ses were check ed fo r mul t ip leen t r ie s by the sam e pe r son , and i f found , the ex t r a oneswere de le ted . The inv i ta tion e -ma i l s were sen t byMic rosof t Word (1997) and Out look Express 5 (1999) .The ma i l and f ax surveys and the e -ma i l

inv i ta tions were sen t on the sam e day . O f the o r ig ina l300 surveys , on ly s ix surveys came back a sunde l ive red . One ma i l su rvey was r e tu rned a s wrongaddress , a l l o f the f ax surveys wen t th roughsuccess fu l ly , and f ive o f the e -ma i l inv i ta t ions werere tu rned a s unde l ive rab le (See Tab le I II ).F I N D I N G SResponse Speed : The f a s te s t me thod was f ax wi th anave rage o f 4 .0 days to r e spond fo l lowed by websurveys wi th 5 .97 days to r e spond ( see Tab le I I I ) . Thes lowes t me thod , a s expec ted , was ma i l su rveys wi th16 .46 days to r e spond . The ove ra l l ave rage re sponsespeed was 8 .84 days . F igure I shows the r e sponsepa t te rns fo r ma i l , f ax and we b surveys .

T a b l e I : C o m p a r i s o n o f m a i l , f ax , a n d w e b - b a s e d s u r v e y s

F a c t or ' M a i l F a x . . . . . . . . . . W e b - b a s e dC o v e r a g eS p e e dR e t u r n C o s tI n c e n t i v e sW r o n g a d d r e s s e sL a b o r n e e d e dE x p e r t i s e t oc o n s t r u c tV a r i a b l e C o s t / e a chs u r v e y *

H i g h L o w L o wLow High HighPreadd ressed /Pres tam ped 800 r e tu rn f ax num ber No cos t to thee n v e l o p e r e s p o n d e n tCa s h / N o n - c a s h i n c e nt i ve s c a n Co u p o n s m a y b e Co u p o n s m a y b ebe inc luded inc luded inc ludedL o w L o w H i g hH i g h M e d i u m L o wL o w M e d i u m H i g hAbou t $1 .00 About $ 0 .50 No cos t

*" These a re e s t ima ted cos ts fo r a 4 -page survey tha t has a popula t ion in the U .S.

407


4/6

T a b l e II" C o m p a r i s o n o f m a i l , f a x a n d e m a i l / w e b b a s e d m e t h o d s ., , , , , M a i l F ax E m a i l / W e b - T O T A Lbased (1 )

Sam ple Size 100 100 100 300Nu mb er no t de l ive rab le 1 0 5 6Pe rcen t no t de l ive rab le j 1% 0% 5% 2%Effec t ive sample s ize 2 99 100 95 294Surveys r e tu rned 26 17 42 85Ra w Re s p o n s e Ra t e 3 2 6 .0 % 1 7 % 4 2 .0 % 2 8 .3 %A d j u s t e d Re s p o n s e Ra t e 4 2 6 .2 7 % 1 7 .0 % 4 4 .2 1 % 2 8 .9 1 %Days to r e spond 16 .46 4 .0 5 .97 8 .84Respo nse Qua l i ty 21 13 36 70( c o m p l e t e d t h e w h o l es u r v e y )Re s p o n s e Q u a l i t y 8 0 .7 % 7 6 .4 % 8 1 .4 % 8 2 .3 %(pe rcen t )Notes"1" N u m b e r n o t d e l i v e r a b l e / Sa m p l e s iz e2 ' Sample s ize -Number no t de l ive rab le3" Surveys r e tu rned /Sample s ize4" Surveys r e tu rned /Ef fec t ive Sample Size

Al thoug h the ave rage r e sponse speed of the f axme thod was f a s te s t (4 .0 days) , the pa t te rn shows tha tthe web surveys came back ve ry qu ick ly in the f i r s tdays ( see Tab le I I I) . Th is cou ld be due to peop le no tr ead ing the i r e -m a i l fo r seve ra l days .Response Ra te : The r e sponse r a te was 26 .27% forma i l , 17 .0% for fax , and 44 .21% for web . U s ing the a rcs ine squa re roo t t r ans forma t ion ANOVA (Kempthorne ,1952) the re was a s ign i f ican t d i f f e rence among there sponse r a te s fo r the two me thods (Chi squa re =9 .336 , d f - 2 , P = .0094) . An LSD type z - te s t showss ign i f ican t d i f f e rences be tween ma i l and e -ma i l /weband be tween f ax and e -ma i l /web , bu t no s ign i f ican td i f f e rence be tween ma i l and f ax . In te rms of r e sponsequa l i ty , tha t i s the c omple ten ess o f the survey , the re i sa l so a s ign i f ican t d i f f e rence among ma i l , f ax and webm e t h o d s ( Ch i s q u a r e = 6 .3 9 8 , d f - 2 , P - . 0 4 0 8 ) .

Cos ts : Tab le IV shows the f ixed and va r iab le cos ts fo rma i l , f ax and web surveys . F ixed cos ts inc ludeddes ign ing the survey and cove r le t te r s which do no tchange based on the number o f su rveys be ing p r in ted ,f axed or e -ma i led . Var iab le cos ts inc luded pr in t ing ,o rgan iz ing , and send ing the surveys . The web me thodcos t the lea s t , $107 .50 whi le the f ax me thod cos t$119 .50 and ma i l me thod cos t $260 .50 . I t i s c lea r tha tthe re i s a s ign i f ican t d i f f e rence be tween ma i l andfax /web me thods . The same d i f f e rence does no t ex is tbe tween f ax and web me thods . However , the va r iab lecost for the web method is $0.00 while i t is $ 0.52 forfax me thod . So , the web me thod would be s ign i f ican t lycheape r than ma i l and f ax me thods when the number o fsubjects is more than 200.

Tab le I II : Respo nse D ays for M a i l , Fa x , a n d W e b S u r v e y sR es po ns e D a y s

Ma i l F a x E m a i l /W eb- ba s ed1-7 day s - 13 258-14 days 8 4 1115-21 da ys 16 - 522-28 days 2 - 1Tota l 26 17 41

408


5/6

Figure I : Response patterns

5 0 -4 0 -

u)Co 3 0 _ 2 .

2 0"a~ : 1 0 _

0

x _Z-2_i i i i i

v ~ v

- . . ._ _ . . . . . . .

I I I I I Ii , , u , , ,@ @ ,,-

D a y s

- e - - M a i l- - a - - F a x

" - E m a i l / W e b

T a b l e I V : S u m m a r y o f c o st s= : : : : : : = : _ : _ : : . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . : : = : : = _ = : . . . . . . . . . . . . : : : : : : = : = : : = : : : : : : : : : : : :: : : : : : : : : : : :: : : : : : : : : : : : :: : : : : : : : : : : =:= - - - v- - === : =:: : := . . . . . . :::::::::::::::::::: ::::::::::::::: : = : : : : : : : = : = : = : : = = : ::::::::::::::::::: :::::::::::::: : : : : : : : : : = : : : : : : = : : : : : : : . : : : : = _ . . = = : : : : : : = : : : :Fixed Uni t Quant i ty Variable T ota lM etho d C o s t C o s t C o s t C o s t

M ail $67.5 $1.93~ 100 $193.0 0 $260.5Fax $67 .5 $0 :52 100 $52 .00 $119 .5W eb $107 .5 $0 .00 100 $0 .00 $107 .5Tota l 242 .5 $2 .45 100 $245 .00 $487 .5

, , , , , , , , ,

T h e c o s t s u m m a r y t a b l e d i d n o t i n c l u d e c o d i n gcos ts . Coding fo r ma i l and f ax surveys has to be donem a n u a l l y w h i l e w e b s u r v e y r e s p o n s e s a r ea u t o m a t i c a l l y c o d e d a s t h e y w e r e a n s w e r e d b y t h ere spondent . When cod ing cos ts a re taken in to

cons ide ra t ion , web surveys appea r to be the mos t cos te f fi c i en t m e t h o d c o m p a r e d t o m a i l a n d f a x m e t h o d s .Da ta Cons is tency : Tab le V shows the means fo r fourfactors identif ied in the s tudy for mail , fax and webm e t h o d s .

T a b l e V : M e a n s f o r f o u r fa c t o r s i d e n t i f ie d i n t h e st u d y f o r m a i l , fa x , a n d w e b m e t h o d s

M e a n s A N O V A R e s u lt sFa c t o r1 . Use o f tr ade ma gaz in es and indus t ry show2. Respons ib i l i ty o f hosp i ta l i ty f acu l ty3 . Appl icab i l i ty o f hosp i ta l i ty re sea rch4 . Pee r - r ev iew processN = 8 5

M a i l F a x W e b F P3.60 3.50 3.36 1.074 .3463.73 .375 3.78 ,075 .9283.21 3.36 3.48 1.767 .1772.55 2.27 2.43 .475 .623

Non e of the f ac to rs were s ign i f ican t ly d i f fe ren t f rome a c h o t h e r i n e a c h m e t h o d . A n a l y s i s o f V a r i a n c erevea led a p -va lue r ang ing f rom 0 .177 to 0 .928 fo r eachfactor .

409


6/6

C O N C L U S I O N SThe resul ts indicate that web surveys have

significant advantages over mail and fax surveys interms of response ra te and cos ts . Fax methods werefastest on the average (4.0 days) fol lowed by the e-mai l /web method (5 .97 days ) . Th i s cou ld be due topeople not reading their e-mail for several days. Thefindings of this s tudy in terms of response rate betweenmail and Internet-based surveys were the same as thoseof Kies ler and Sproul l (1986) , Parker (1992) , andBachm an, E l f r ink , and Vazza na (2000) . In add i t ion ,th i s s tudy has shown that fax methodology d id no tyield s ignificant ly different response rate from mailmethodology for educators . Th i s may be due toeducators not using fax as much as businessmen.Another fac tor might be tha t educators may no tperceive fax messages as more impor tan t , convenien t ,and accessible while business people perceive them tobe more impor tan t than mai l and more convenien t(Dickson & MacLachan , 1996) .

Based on the findings of this s tudy, i t isrecommended us ing e-mai l /web-based surveys whensurveying educators for three reasons; f i rs t , e-mail /webmethodology yields a higher response rate at less costand more rapidly than mail surveys. Second, themajori ty of educators have access to e-mail and in theUnited States . Final ly, s ince e-mail /web surveys codethe data automatical ly el iminat ing hand-coding, i tsaves the researcher t ime and resources. For those ofthe sample educators who do no t have e-mai l and webaccess , other methodologies such as mail and fax couldbe used as a means for mixed design. However,researchers need to measure any s ignificant differencesbetween d i f feren t methodolog ies .R E F E R E N C E S

Bachmann, D. P. , Elfrink, J . , & Vazzana, G. (2000). E-mail and snai l mai l face off in rematch.M arket ing Research, 11, 4, pp. 10- ! 5 .Beck, J . (1996). Career anchors , organizat ionalcom mitm ent , and job plateaus" an analysis ofho te l execu t ive opera t ing commi t tee members 'career development . (Doctoral Dissertat ion,Purdue Universi ty, 1996). Dissertat ion AbstractsInternat ional ,58 (03). (Publ icat ion Number:A A T 9 7 2 5 5 08 ) .

de Leeuw, E. D. (1992). Data Qual i ty in Mail ,Te leph one , . and Face- to -Face S urveys .Amsterdam" TT Publ icat ions.

Dickson, J . P. & MacLachlan, D. L. (1996). Faxsurveys : Return pat t erns and compar i son wi thmail surveys. Journal of Market ing Research,33, pp. 108-113.

Dil lman, D. A. (1978). Mail and Telephone Surveys"The Tota l Des ign Method . New York : Wi ley-Interscience.Dil lman, D. A. (1999). Mail and Internet Surveys" TheTai lored Design Me thod, 2 nd Edi t ionl N ew York:

John Wi ley and Sons .Dil lman, D.A. & Tarnai , J . (1988). Administ rat ive

issues in mixed mode surveys. In R. M. Groves,P.P. Biemer, L. E. Lyberg, J . T. Massey, W. L.Nichol ls , II & J . Wakesberg (Eds.) , Telephonesurvey methodology . (pp . 509-528) . New York :Wi ley .

Efax .com (2000) . [on- line] h t tp :/ /www .efax .comHare, S. , Price, J . H. , Flynn, M. G. , & King, K. A.

(1998). Increasing return rates of a mail survey toexerc i se p rofess ional us ing a modes t monetaryincent ive. Perceptual and Motor Ski l ls , 86, 1 , pp.217-218 .

Keisler, S. , & Sproul l , L.S. (1986). Response effects inthe electronic survey. Publ ic Opinion Quarterly,5__0_03, pp. 402-413.

Kem pthorne , Oscar (1952) . The Des ign and Analys i s o fExper iments . (pp . 156-157) N ew York : Wi ley .Microsof t Exchange (1995) . M icrosof t Corpora t ion .Microsof t Fax (1995) . M icrosof t Corpora t ion .

Microsof t Wo rd (1997) . Microsof t Corpora t ion .Out look Express (1999) . M icrosof t Corpora t ion .Parker, L. (1992). Col lect ing data in the e-mail way.

Train ing and Development .Schwarz, N. Hippler, H. J . , & Noel le-Neumann, E.

(1992) . A cogni t ive model o f response-orderef fec t s in survey measurement . In N. Schwarz &S. Sudman (Eds.) , Context Effects in Social andPsycholog ical Research (pp . 187-199) . NewYork: S pr ingger-Ver lag .

Shank, M. D. , Darr, B. D. , & Werner, T. C. (1990).Increasing mail survey response rates:Inves t igat ing the perceived value of cash versusnon-cash incen t ives . Appl ied Market ingResearch, 30, 3, pp. 28-32.

Sheehan, B. K. & McMillan, J . S. (1999). Responsevariat ion in e-mail surveys" An explorat ion.Journal of Advert is ing Journa l , 39,4, pp. 45-54.Zatz , D. (2 000 ). C rea te e ffec tive e-m ail s urv eys . H___RRMagazine, 45, 1, pp. 97-103.

410

Documents

Web Based Surey