From Inbox Reception to Compliance: A Field Experiment Examining the Effects of E-mail Address and Subject Line on Response and Compliance Rates in Initial E-mail Encounters

Abstract

Within text-based computer-mediated communication, individuals use available cues to form and guide initial encounters. The goal of this study was to examine how e-mail cues influence the effectiveness of initial e-mail communication in a professional context. A field experiment was conducted to examine how two readily available inbox-level cues—e-mail address (professional vs. nonprofessional) and subject line (clear vs. unclear)—influence the likelihood that an e-mail will be opened and the likelihood of the receiver complying with the e-mail’s request to complete an online survey. Analysis of e-mails sent to professors (N = 2,021) from 24 academic institutions across the United States revealed that e-mails sent from a professional e-mail address coupled with an unclear subject line resulted in the greatest likelihood that an e-mail would be opened. Analysis found robust support for e-mail address professionalism to increase the likelihood that an embedded survey link will be clicked on and the subsequent survey completed. Theoretical and practical implications along with directions for future research are discussed.

Keywords

e-mail communication e-mail address subject line computer-mediated communication professional communication social context cues

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Berger

C. R.

Calabrese

R. J.

(1975). Some explorations in initial interaction and beyond: Toward a developmental theory of interpersonal communication. Human Communication Research, 1, 99–112. doi:10.1111/j.1468-2958.1975.tb00258.x

Bolkan

Holmgren

J. L

. (2012). “You are such a great teacher and I hate to bother you but…”: Instructors’ perceptions of students and their use of email messages with varying politeness strategies. Communication Education, 61, 253–270. doi:10.1080/03634523.2012.667135

Bunz

Campbell

S. W.

(2004). Politeness accommodation in electronic mail. Communication Research Reports, 21, 11–25. doi:10.1080/08824090409359963

Carr

C. T.

Stefaniak

(2012). Sent from my iPhone: The medium and message as cues of sender professionalism in mobile telephony. Journal of Applied Communication Research, 40, 403–424. doi:10.1080/00909882.2012.712707

Cornetto

K. M.

Nowak

K. L.

(2006). Utilizing usernames for sex categorization in computer-mediated communication: Examining perceptions and accuracy. CyberPsychology and Behavior, 9, 377–387. doi:10.1089/cpb.2006.9.377

Daft

R. L.

Lengel

R. H.

(1986). Organizational information requirements, media richness and structural design. Management Science, 32, 554–571. doi:10.1287/mnsc.32.5.554

Douglas

K. M.

McGarty

(2002). Internet identifiability and beyond: A model of the effects of identifiability on communicative behavior. Group Dynamics: Theory, Research, and Practice, 6, 17–26. doi:10.1037/1089-2699.6.1.17

Gill

A. J.

Oberlander

Austin

(2006). Rating e-mail personality at zero acquaintance. Personality and Individual Differences, 40, 497–507. doi:10.1016/j.paid.2005.06.027

Heisler

J. M.

Crabill

S. L.

(2006). Who are “stinkybug” and “Packerfan4”? Email pseudonyms and participants’ perceptions of demography, productivity, and personality. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 12, 114–135. doi:10.1111/j.1083-6101.2006.00317.x

10.

Herring

S. C.

(2002). Computer-mediated communication on the Internet. Annual Review of Information Science and Technology, 36, 109–168. doi:10.1002/aris.1440360104

11.

Jacobson

(1999). Impression formation in cyberspace: Online expectations and offline experiences in text-based virtual communities. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 5. doi:10.1111/j.1083-6101.1999.tb00333.x

12.

Jaech

Ostendorf

(2015). What your username says about you. In Proceedings of the 2015 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing (pp. 2032–2037). Lisbon, Portugal: Association for Computational Linguistics. Retrieved from https://arxiv.org/abs/1507.02045

13.

Janke

(2014). Effects of mentioning the incentive prize in the email subject line on survey response. Evidence Based Library and Information Practice, 9, 4–13. doi:10.18438/B8VW27

14.

Kalman

Y. M.

Rafaeli

(2011). Online pauses and silence: Chronemic expectancy violations in written computer-mediated communication. Communication Research, 38, 54–69. doi:10.1177/0093650210378229

15.

Kooti

Aiello

L. M.

Grbovic

Lerman

Mantrach

(2015). Evolution of conversations in the age of email overload. In Proceedings of the 24th International Conference on World Wide Web (pp. 603–613). Florence, Italy: IW3C2. Retrieved from https://dl.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=2741130

16.

Lea

Spears

(1992) Paralanguage and social perception in computer-mediated communication. Journal of Organizational Computing, 2, 321–341. doi:10.1080/10919399209540190

17.

Loewenstein

(1994). The psychology of curiosity: A review and reinterpretation. Psychological Bulletin, 116, 75–98. doi:10.1037/0033-2909.116.1.75

18.

Pal

Counts

(2011). What’s in a @name? How name value biases judgment of microblog authors. In Proceedings of the Fifth International AAAI Conference on Weblogs and Social Media (pp. 257–264). Menlo Park, CA: AAAI. Retrieved from https://www.aaai.org/ocs/index.php/ICWSM/ICWSM11/paper/view/2735/3309

19.

Pelletier

(2009). You’ve got mail: Identity perceptions based on email usernames. Journal of Undergraduate Research at Minnesota State University, Mankato, 9, 1–17.

20.

Petrovčič

Petrič

Manfreda

K. L.

(2016). The effect of email invitation elements on response rate in a web survey within an online community. Computers in Human Behavior, 56, 320–329. doi:10.1016/j.chb.2015.11.025

21.

Pew Research Center. (2008). Search and email still top the list of most popular online activities (Report). Retrieved October 21, 2017, from http://www.pewinternet.org/2011/08/09/search-and-email-still-top-the-list-of-most-popular-online-activities/

22.

Pignata

Lushington

Sloan

Buchanan

(2015). Employees’ perceptions of email communication, volume and management strategies in an Australian university. Journal of Higher Education Policy and Management, 37, 159–171. doi:10.1080/1360080X.2015.1019121

23.

Porter

S. R.

Whitcomb

M. E.

(2005). E-mail subject lines and their effect on web survey viewing and response. Social Science Computer Review, 23, 380–387. doi:10.1177/0894439305275912

24.

Sahni

N. S.

Wheeler

S. C.

Chintagunta

(2018). Personalization in email marketing: The role of noninformative advertising content. Marketing Science, 37, 236–258. https://doi.org/10.1287/mksc.2017.1066

25.

Sappleton

Lourenço

(2016). Email subject lines and response rates to invitations to participate in a web survey and a face-to-face interview: The sound of silence. International Journal of Social Research Methodology, 19, 611–622. doi:10.1080/13645579.2015.1078596

26.

Siu

Iverson

Tang

(2006). Going with the flow: Email awareness and task management. In Proceedings of the 20th Anniversary Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work (pp. 441–450). Retrieved from https://dl.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=1180942

27.

Shinohara

Aoki

Tsujimoto

Suganuma

Furukawa

(2018). Effect of recruitment methods on response rate in a web-based study for primary care physicians: Factorial randomized controlled trial. Journal of Medical Internet Research, 20, e28. doi:10.2196/jmir.8561

28.

Sproull

Kiesler

(1986). Reducing social context cues: Electronic mail in organizational communication. Management Science, 32, 1492–1512. doi:10.1287/mnsc.32.11.1492

29.

Stephens

K. K.

Houser

M. L.

Cowan

R. L.

(2009). RU able to meat me: The impact of students’ overly casual email messages to instructors. Communication Education, 58, 303–326. doi:10.1080/03634520802582598

30.

Wainer

Dabbish

Kraut

(2011). Should I open this email? Inbox-level cues, curiosity and attention to email. In Proceedings of the 2011 Annual Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (pp. 3439–3448). Retrieved from https://dl.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=1979456

31.

Walther

J. B.

(1992). Interpersonal effects in computer-mediated interaction a relational perspective. Communication Research, 19, 52–90. doi:10.1177/009365092019001003

32.

Walther

J. B.

(1996). Computer-mediated communication: Impersonal, interpersonal, and hyperpersonal Interaction. Communication Research, 23, 3–43. doi:10.1177/009365096023001001

33.

Walther

J. B.

D’Addario

K. P.

(2001). The impacts of emoticons on message interpretation in computer-mediated communication. Social Science Computer Review, 19, 324–347. doi:10.1177/089443930101900307

34.

Walther

J. B.

Tidwell

L. C.

(1995) Nonverbal cues in computer-mediated communication, and the effect of chronemics on relational communication. Journal of Organizational Computing, 5, 355–378. doi:10.1080/10919399509540258

35.

Young

Kelsey

Lancaster

(2011). Predicted outcome value of e-mail communication: Factors that foster professional relational development between students and teachers. Communication Education, 60, 371–388. doi:10.1080/03634523.2011.563388