Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 566

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Understanding Mail Survey Response Behavior: A Meta-Analysis

Yammarino, Francis J., Skinner, Steven J., Childers, Terry L.·1991·Public Opinion Quarterly

Abstract

A meta-analysis of prior studies of techniques designed to induce mail survey response rates was conducted. Research encompassing 184 effects (study outcomes) in 115 studies (articles) for 17 predictors of response rate was examined. The average effect size across all manipulations was r=.065, indicating an average increase of about 6.5 percent in response rates for manipulations. Effect sizes for specific predictors and two potential moderators of effects were examined. Results indicated that repeated contacts in the form of preliminary notification and follow-ups, appeals, inclusion of a return envelope, postage, and monetary incentives, were effective in increasing survey response rates. Significant effect sizes for the predictors ranged from an increase in response of 2 percent to 31 percent. Implications of the results for the conduct of mail surveys and future research on mail survey response behavior are discussed.

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 · 10.1086/269284

Cites

2 of 2 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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

Metadata

Authors
Yammarino, F. J., Skinner, S. J., & Childers, T. L.
Venue
Public Opinion Quarterly
Published
1991
Volume
55
Issue
4
Pages
613
ISSN
0033-362X (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W1969736152
Cited by
566
References
2
FWCI
14.83
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

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.