Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 670

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Mail Survey Response Rate: A Meta-Analysis of Selected Techniques for Inducing Response

Fox, Richard J., Crask, Melvin R., Kim, Jonghoon·1988·Public Opinion Quarterly

Abstract

This article reports the results of a meta-analysis of experimental studies which have examined ten different factors felt to influence response rates to mail surveys. The form of meta-analysis used clearly defines the individual impact of each of the factors examined. Results indicate that prenotification and follow-ups increase the response rate, as does the type of outgoing postage used. Furthermore, studies sponsored by a university receive greater returns. Increases in the size of the monetary incentive used appear to have decreasing marginal gains. Finally, some evidence exists to suggest that the color of the questionnaire influences response rate.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1086/269125

Cites

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cited by

See all 670

Metadata

Authors
Fox, R. J., Crask, M. R., & Kim, J.
Venue
Public Opinion Quarterly
Published
1988
Volume
52
Issue
4
Pages
467
ISSN
0033-362X (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2159987121
Cited by
670
References
0
FWCI
26.19
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Mail Survey Response Rate: A Meta-Analysis of Selected Techniques for Inducing Response. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1086/269125
The paper
Fox, R. J., Crask, M. R., & Kim, J. (1988). Mail Survey Response Rate: A Meta-Analysis of Selected Techniques for Inducing Response. Public Opinion Quarterly. https://doi.org/10.1086/269125

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.