This Article Full Text (PDF) References Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Citation Map Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Add to Saved Citations Download to citation manager Request Permissions Request Reprints Add to My Marked Citations Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Citing Articles via Scopus Google Scholar Articles by Mavis, B. E. Articles by Brocato, J. J. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Mavis, B. E. Articles by Brocato, J. J. Social Bookmarking                         What's this?

Postal Surveys versus Electronic Mail Surveys

The Tortoise and the Hare Revisited

Joseph J. Brocato

Michigan State University

The advent of computer-based technology has led to a consideration of change in research methods that exploit the advantages of computer-mediated communications. In survey research, electronic mail (e-mail) has anecdotally shown particular promise as a data collection tool. This article compares traditional postal and nontraditional e-mail surveys within the context of a larger listserv evaluation project in terms of overall return rate, distribution of survey returns over time, response to initial and follow-up mailings, representativeness of respondent groups, thoroughness of survey completion, and the likelihood of respondents to include additional written comments. In summary, whereas postal surveys were shown to be superior to e-mail surveys with regard to response rate, all things being equal, the decision of which to use may be situation-specific, dependent on issues such as survey cost, desire for convenience and timeliness in data collection, and need for higher response rates, among others.

Evaluation & the Health Professions, Vol. 21, No. 3, 395-408 (1998)
DOI: 10.1177/016327879802100306


CiteULike    Complore    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter    What's this?

This article has been cited by other articles:

				P. J. Kroth, L. McPherson, R. Leverence, W. Pace, E. Daniels, R. L. Rhyne, R. L. Williams, and For The Prime Net Consortium Combining Web-Based and Mail Surveys Improves Response Rates: A PBRN Study From PRIME Net Ann. Fam. Med, May 1, 2009; 7(3): 245 - 248. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				S. Sprague, L. Quigley, and M. Bhandari Survey Design in Orthopaedic Surgery: Getting Surgeons to Respond J. Bone Joint Surg. Am., May 1, 2009; 91(Supplement_3): 27 - 34. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				P. L. Bailey, L. G. Glance, M. P. Eaton, B. Parshall, and S. McIntosh A Survey of the Use of Ultrasound During Central Venous Catheterization Anesth. Analg., March 1, 2007; 104(3): 491 - 497. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				J. L. Holley, S. N. Davison, and A. H. Moss Nephrologists' Changing Practices in Reported End-of-Life Decision-Making Clin. J. Am. Soc. Nephrol., January 1, 2007; 2(1): 107 - 111. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				S. N. Davison, G. S. Jhangri, J. L. Holley, and A. H. Moss Nephrologists' Reported Preparedness for End-of-Life Decision-Making Clin. J. Am. Soc. Nephrol., November 1, 2006; 1(6): 1256 - 1262. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				F O'Leary Is email a reliable means of contacting authors of previously published papers? A study of the Emergency Medicine Journal for 2001 Emerg. Med. J., July 1, 2003; 20(4): 352 - 353. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				E. G. VanDenKerkhof, B. Milne, and J. L. Parlow Knowledge and Practice Regarding Prophylactic Perioperative Beta Blockade in Patients Undergoing Noncardiac Surgery: A Survey of Canadian Anesthesiologists Anesth. Analg., June 1, 2003; 96(6): 1558 - 1565. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				C. Cook, F. Heath, and R. L. Thompson A Meta-Analysis of Response Rates in Web- or Internet-Based Surveys Educational and Psychological Measurement, December 1, 2000; 60(6): 821 - 836. [Abstract] [PDF]