The DOI matches its Crossref record; 7 of the 7 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Web Surveys versus other Survey Modes: A Meta-Analysis Comparing Response Rates
Abstract
One question that arises when discussing the usefulness of web-based surveys is whether they gain the same response rates compared to other modes of collecting survey data. A common perception exists that, in general, web survey response rates are considerably lower. However, such unsystematic anecdotal evidence could be misleading and does not provide any useful quantitative estimate. Metaanalytic procedures synthesising controlled experimental mode comparisons could give accurate answers but, to the best of the authors' knowledge, such research syntheses have so far not been conducted. To overcome this gap, the authors have conducted a meta-analysis of 45 published and unpublished experimental comparisons between web and other survey modes. On average, web surveys yield an 11% lower response rate compared to other modes (the 95% confidence interval is confined by 15% and 6% to the disadvantage of the web mode). This response rate difference to the disadvantage of the web mode is systematically influenced by the sample recruitment base (a smaller difference for panel members as compared to one-time respondents), the solicitation mode chosen for web surveys (a greater difference for postal mail solicitation compared to email) and the number of contacts (the more contacts, the larger the difference in response rates between modes). No significant influence on response rate differences can be revealed for the type of mode web surveys are compared to, the type of target population, the type of sponsorship, whether or not incentives were offered, and the year the studies were conducted. Practical implications 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.
Integrity signals
Registry
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.
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
Cites
The file drawer problem and tolerance for null results.
Rosenthal, R. (1979) · Psychological Bulletin · doi:10.1037/0033-2909.86.3.638 · Cited by 9,068
Primary, Secondary, and Meta-Analysis of Research
GLASS, G. V. (1976) · Educational Researcher · doi:10.3102/0013189x005010003 · Cited by 4,890
Hunter, J., & Schmidt, F. (2004) · doi:10.4135/9781412985031 · Cited by 3,023
Fixed-and random-effects models in meta-analysis.
Hedges, L. V., & Vevea, J. L. (1998) · Psychological Methods · doi:10.1037/1082-989x.3.4.486 · Cited by 2,977
Nonresponse rates and nonresponse bias in household surveys
Groves, R. M. (2006) · Public Opinion Quarterly · doi:10.1093/poq/nfl033 · Cited by 2,420
Meta-analysis of psychotherapy outcome studies.
Smith, M. L., & Glass, G. V. (1977) · American Psychologist · doi:10.1037/0003-066x.32.9.752 · Cited by 2,154
Assessing Response Rates and Nonresponse Bias in Web and Paper Surveys
Sax, L. J., Gilmartin, S. K., & Bryant, A. N. (2003) · Research in Higher Education · doi:10.1023/a:1024232915870 · Cited by 1,294
Cited by
Factors affecting response rates of the web survey: A systematic review
Fan, W., & Yan, Z. (2010) · Computers in Human Behavior · doi:10.1016/j.chb.2009.10.015 · Cited by 1,521
Response rates of online surveys in published research: A meta-analysis
Wu, M.-J., Zhao, K., & Fils-Aime, F. (2022) · Computers in Human Behavior Reports · doi:10.1016/j.chbr.2022.100206 · Cited by 1,135
The viability of crowdsourcing for survey research
Behrend, T. S., Sharek, D. J., Meade, A. W., & Wiebe, E. N. (2011) · Behavior Research Methods · doi:10.3758/s13428-011-0081-0 · Cited by 1,018
Web Survey Methods: Introduction
Couper, M. P., & Miller, P. V. (2008) · Public Opinion Quarterly · doi:10.1093/poq/nfn066 · Cited by 560
Survey response rates: Trends and a validity assessment framework
Holtom, B., Baruch, Y., Aguinis, H., & A Ballinger, G. (2022) · Human Relations · doi:10.1177/00187267211070769 · Cited by 380
Metadata
- Authors
- Manfreda, K. L., Bosnjak, M., Berzelak, J., Haas, I., & Vehovar, V.
- Venue
- International Journal of Market Research
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications
- Published
- 2008-01
- Volume
- 50
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 79-104
- ISSN
- 1470-7853 (ISSN-L)
- 2515-2173
- OpenAlex
- W1493524810
- Cited by
- 1,000
- References
- 7
- FWCI
- 45.97
- 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: Web Surveys versus other Survey Modes: A Meta-Analysis Comparing Response Rates. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1177/147078530805000107
- The paper
- Manfreda, K. L., Bosnjak, M., Berzelak, J., Haas, I., & Vehovar, V. (2008). Web Surveys versus other Survey Modes: A Meta-Analysis Comparing Response Rates. International Journal of Market Research. https://doi.org/10.1177/147078530805000107
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.