Response Rates in Organizational Science, 1995–2008: A Meta-analytic Review and Guidelines for Survey Researchers

Abstract

Purpose This study expands upon existing knowledge of response rates by conducting a large-scale quantitative review of published response rates. This allowed a finegrained comparison of response rates across respondent groups. Other unique features of this study are the analysis of response enhancing techniques across respondent groups and response rate trends over time. In order to aid researchers in designing surveys, we provide expected response rate percentiles for different survey modalities. Design We analyzed 2,037 surveys, covering 1,251,651 individual respondents, published in 12 journals in I/O Psychology, Management, and Marketing during the period 1995-2008. Expected response rate levels were summarized for different types of respondents and use of response enhancing techniques was coded for each study. Findings First, differences in mean response rate were found across respondent types with the lowest response rates reported for executive respondents and the highest for non-working respondents and non-managerial employees. Second, moderator analyses suggested that the effectiveness of response enhancing techniques was dependent on type of respondents. Evidence for differential prediction across respondent type was found for incentives, salience, identification numbers, sponsorship, and administration mode. When controlling for increased use of response enhancing techniques, a small decline in response rates over time was found. Implications Our findings suggest that existing guidelines for designing effective survey research may not always offer the most accurate information available. Survey researchers should be aware that they may obtain lower/ higher response rates depending on the respondent type surveyed and that some response enhancing techniques may be less/more effective in specific samples. Originality/value This study, analyzing the largest set of published response rates to date, offers the first evidence for different response rates and differential functioning of response enhancing techniques across respondent types.

Organisational age cultures: The interplay of chief executive officers age and attitudes toward younger and older employees

“…Finally, the response rate in this study was much lower than response rates typically reported in unsolicited mailout studies with employees (Anseel et al, 2010;Baruch and Holtom, 2008;Cycyota and Harrison, 2006). Surveys of senior managers and business owners generally yield much lower response rates.…”

An Inductive Exploration of Manuscript Quality and Publication Success in Small Research Teams

“…The higher response rate from authors of accepted papers, compared to those whose papers were rejected, was anticipated. Because a favorable outcome (e.g., paper acceptance) likely yielded a more positive association with the survey sponsor (e.g., Journal of Business and Psychology), it was expected that these authors would have a greater propensity to respond (Anseel et al 2010;Spitzmuller et al 2006).…”

Turning ideas into products: subjective well-being in co-creation

“…The response rate was around 25 percent, in line with the general response rate by email invitation (Anseel et al, 2010), with a final collected sample of 142. Only 129 respondents passed data-quality checks, 72 for the Italian sample and 57 for the Spanish sample.…”