Response rates, item omissions, response patterns, personality characteristics, and job performance were tested for relationships to anonymity on questionnaires mailed to the salesmen of a national organization. No significant differences were found between the identified group and the anonymous group.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
AshPhilip and AbromsonEdward. “The Effect of Anonymity on Attitude-Questionnaire Response,” Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 47 (1952), 722–3.
2.
BensonLawrence E. “Studies in Secret-Ballot Technique,” Public Opinion Quarterly, 5 (March 1941), 79–82.
3.
ButlerRichard P. “Effects of Signed and Unsigned Questionnaires for Both Sensitive and Nonsensitive Items,” Journal of Applied Psychology, 57 (1973), 348–9.
4.
ChurchillG. A.Jr., FordN. M., and WalkerO. C.Jr. “Measuring the Job Satisfaction of Industrial Salesmen,” Journal of Marketing Research, 11 (August 1974), 254–60.
5.
CoreyStephen M. “Signed Versus Unsigned Attitude Questionnaires,” Journal of Educational Psychology, 28 (January 1937), 144–8.
6.
CrawfordC. M. “Attitudes of Marketing Executives Toward Ethics in Marketing Research,” Journal of Marketing, 34 (April 1970), 46–52.
7.
CronbachLee J.Essentials of Psychological Testing.New York: Harper and Brothers, 1949, 402.
8.
DicksonJohn P., CaseyMichael J., and WyckoffDaniel W.. “The Invisible Ink Caper—or a Watergate Mentality in Marketing Research Ethics,” in SchneiderHoward C., ed., Proceedings, American Institute for Decision Sciences, 1976, 274.
9.
ElinsonJack and HainesValerie T.. “Role of Anonymity in Attitude Surveys,” American Psychologist, 5 (1950), 315.
10.
EvansChester R. “Item Structure Variation as a Methodological Problem in an Employee Survey,” American Psychologist, 4 (July 1949), 208.
11.
FischerRobert P. “Signed Versus Unsigned Personal Questionnaires,” Journal of Applied Psychology, 30 (April 1946) 220–5.
12.
FullerCarol. “Effect of Anonymity on Return Rate and Response Bias in a Mail Survey,” Journal of Applied Psychology, 59 (June 1974), 292–6.
13.
FutrellCharles M., SwanJohn E., and ToddJohn T.. “Job Performance Related to Management Control Systems for Pharmaceutical Salesmen,” Journal of Marketing Research, 13 (February 1976), 25–33.
14.
GerberichJ. B. and MasonJ. M.. “Signed Versus Unsigned Questionnaire,” Journal of Educational Research, 42 (September 1948), 122–6.
15.
HamelLa Verne and ReilHans G.. “Should Attitude Questionnaires be Signed?” Personnel Psychology, 5 (Summer 1952), 87–91.
16.
KingFrancis W. “Anonymous Versus Identifiable Questionnaires in Drug Usage Surveys,” Psychology in Action, 25 (October 1970), 982–5.
17.
KosonD., KitchenC., KochenM., and StodoloskyD.. “Psychological Testing by Computer: Effect on Response Bias,” Educational and Psychological Measurement, 30 (Winter 1970), 803–10.
18.
LinskyArnold A. “Stimulating Responses to Mailed Questionnaires: A Review,” Public Opinion Quarterly, 39 (Spring 1975) 91–5.
19.
OlsonWillard C. “The Waiver of Signature in Personal Reports,” Journal of Applied Psychology, 20 (1936) 442–50.
20.
PearlinLeonard I. “The Appeals of Anonymity in Questionnaire Response,” Public Opinion Quarterly, 25 (Winter 1961), 640–7.
21.
RosenNed A. “Anonymity and Attitude Measurement,” Public Opinion Quarterly, 24 (1960), 675–9.
22.
RosenbergMorris. “Misanthropy and Political Ideology,” American Sociological Review, 21 (1956), 690–5.
23.
SmithPatricia C., KendallLorne M., and HulinCharles L.. The Measurement of Satisfaction in Work and Retirement.Chicago: Rand McNally, 1969.
