The use of online data collection techniques in sport marketing research has increased in recent years. The value of data obtained this way is determined, in part, by the quality of survey response. Scholars have studied strategies that enhance survey response, including the use of notification and topic salience. However, empirical support for the use of notification has been obtained primarily from mail-based survey research, so it is unclear if the benefits would be evident with online data collection. This study examined the influence of notification techniques and topic salience, measured as fan identification, on two metrics commonly used to measure survey response: response rate and response quality. Overall, findings revealed a significant relationship between notification and response rate while no relationship was found between notification and response quality. Additionally, there was no relationship between fan identification scores and survey participation while a relationship between fan identification and response quality was identified.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
AbrahamK. G., MaitlandA., & BianchiS. M. (2006). Nonresponse in the American time use survey. Public Opinion Quarterly, 70, 676–703.
2.
The American Association for Public Opinion Research (2009).Standard definitions: Final dispositions of case codes and outcome rates for surveys (6th ed.). AAPOR.
AnseelF., LievensF., SchollaertE., & ChoragwickaB. (2010). Response rates in Organizational science, 1995-2008: A meta-analytic review and guidelines for survey researchers. Journal of Business and Psychology, 25, 335–349.
5.
ArmstrongK. (2002). Race and sport consumption motivations: A preliminary investigation of a Black Consumers’ Sport Motivation Scale. Journal of Sport Behavior, 25, 309–330.
6.
ArmstrongJ.S., & OvertonT.S. (1977). Handling nonresponse bias in mail surveys. Journal of Marketing Research, 14, 396–402.
7.
BarriosM., VillarroyaA., BorregoÁ., & OllèC. (2011). Response Rates and Data Quality in Web and Mail Surveys Administered to Ph D Holders. Social Science Computer Review, 29, 208–220.
8.
BaruchY. (1999). Response rate in academic studies-a comparative analysis. Human Relations, 52, 421–438.
9.
BeattyP., & HerrmannD. (2002). To answer or not to answer: Decision processes related to survey item nonresponse. In Groves et al. (Eds.), Survey nonresponse, (pp. 71–85), New York, NY: John Wiley & Sons.
10.
ColeS. T. (2005). Comparing mail and web-based survey distribution methods: Results of surveys to leisure travel retailers. Journal of Travel Research, 43, 422–430.
11.
CookC., HeathF., & ThompsonR. L. (2000). A meta-analysis of response rates in web- or internet-based surveys. Educational and Psychology Measurement, 60, 821–836.
12.
CrawfordS.D., CouperM. P., & LamiasM. J. (2001). Web surveys: Perceptions of burden. Social Science Computer Review, 19, 146–162.
13.
CurtinR., PresserS., & SingerE. (2005). Changes in telephone survey nonresponse over the past quarter century. Public Opinion Quarterly, 69, 87–98.
14.
DeutskensE., de RuyterK., & WetzelsM. (2006). An assessment of equivalence between online and mail surveys in service research. Journal of Survey Research, 8, 346–355.
15.
DeutskensE., de RuyterK., WetzelsM., & OosterveldP. (2004). Response rate and response quality of internet-based surveys: An experimental study. Marketing Letters, 15, 21–36.
16.
Diazde rada V. (2005). The effect of follow-up mailings on the response rate and response quality in mail surveys. Quality & Quantity, 39, 1–18.
17.
DillmanD. A., EltingeJ. L., GrovesR. M., & LittleR. J. A. (2002). Survey nonresponse in design, data collection, and analysis. In GrovesR., DillmanD., EltingeJ., & LittleR. J. A. (Eds.), Survey nonresponse (pp. 3–26). New York, NY: Wiley Interscience.
18.
DillmanD.A., SmythJ. D., & ChristianL. M. (2009). Internet, mail, and mixed-mode surveys: the tailored design method (3rd ed.). Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons.
19.
DooleyL. M., & LinderJ. R. (2003). The handling of nonresponse error. Human Resource Development Quarterly, 14, 99–110.
20.
FieldA. P. (2009). Discovering statistics using SPSS (3rd ed.). London: Sage Publications Ltd.
21.
FiloK., FunkD. C., & O'BrienD. (2010). The antecedents and outcomes of attachment and sponsor image within charity sport events. Journal of Sport Management, 24, 623–648.
22.
FunkD. C. & PritchardM. P. (2006). Sport publicity: Commitment's moderation of message effects. Journal of Business Research, 59, 613–621.
23.
GalesicM., & BosnjakM. (2009). Effects of questionnaire length on participation and indicators of response quality in a web survey. Public Opinion Quarterly, 73, 349–360.
24.
GöritzA. S. (2004). The impact of material incentives on response quantity, response quality, sample composition, survey outcome, and cost in online access panels. International Journal of Market Research, 46, 327–345.
25.
GöritzA. S. (2006). Incentives in web surveys: methodological issues and a review. International Journal of Internet Science, 1, 58–70.
26.
GreelawC., & Brown-WeltyS. (2009). A comparison of web-based and paper-based survey methods. Evaluation Review, 33, 464–480.
27.
GrovesR. M., PresserS., & DipkoS. (2004). The role of topic interest in survey participation decisions. Public Opinion Quarterly, 68, 2–31.
28.
GrovesR. M., SingerE., & CorningA. (2000). Leverage-saliency theory of survey participation: Description and an illustration. Public Opinion Quarterly, 64, 299–308.
29.
GwinnerK., & SwansonS. R. (2003). A model of fan identification: Antecedents and sponsorship outcomes. Journal of Services Marketing, 17, 275–294.
30.
HartA., BrennanC. W., SymD., & LarsonE. (2009). The impact of personalized prenotification on response rates to an electronic survey. Western Journal of Nursing Research, 31, 17–23.
31.
JordanJ. S., WalkerM., KentA., & InoueY. (2011). The frequency of nonresponse analyses in the Journal of Sport Management. Journal of Sport Management, 25, 229–239.
32.
KaplowitzM., HadlockT. D., & LevineR. (2004). A comparison of web and mail survey response rates. Public Opinion Quarterly, 68, 94–101.
33.
KentA., & TurnerB. (2002). Increasing response rates among coaches: The role of prenotification methods. Journal of Sport Management, 16, 230–238.
34.
KunkelT., FunkD, & HillB. (2013). Brand architecture, drivers of consumer involvement, and brand loyalty with professional sport leagues and teams. Journal of Sport Management, 27, 177–192.
35.
KwakN., & RadlerB. (2002). A comparison between mail and web surveys: Response pattern, respondent profile, and data quality. Journal of Official Statistics, 18, 257–273.
36.
LavrakasP. J. (Ed.). (2008). Encyclopedia of survey research methods (Vol. 2). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
37.
MaelF., & AshforthB. E. (1992). Alumni and their alma mater: A partial test of the reformulated model of organizational identification. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 13, 103–123.
38.
MarcusB., BosnjakM., LindnerS., PilischenkoS., & SchützA. (2007). Compensating for low topic interest and long surveys: A field experiment on nonresponse in web surveys. Social Science Computer Review, 25, 372–383.
MillerL. E., & SmithK. L. (1983). Handling nonresponse issues. Journal of Extension, 21, 45–50.
41.
Muñoz-LeivaF., Sánchez-FernándezJ., Montoro-RíosF., & Ibáñez-ZapataJ. Á. (2010). Improving the response rate and quality in Web-based surveys through the personalization and frequency of reminder mailings. Quality & Quantity, 44, 1037–1052.
42.
PanB. (2010). Online travel surveys and response patterns. Journal of Travel Research, 49, 121–135.
43.
PettyR. E., & CacioppoJ. T. (1986). The elaboration likelihood model of persuasion. In BerkowitzL (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology, (Vol. 19, pp. 123–205). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
RogelbergS. G., ConwayJ. M., SederburgM. E., SpitzmüllerC., AzizS., & KnightW. E. (2003). Profiling active and passive nonrespondents to an organizational survey. Journal of Applied Psychology, 88, 1104.
46.
RooseH., LievensJ., & WaegeH. (2007). The joint effect of topic interest and follow-up procedures on the response in a mail questionnaire: An empirical test of the leverage-saliency theory in audience research. Sociological Methods & Research, 35, 410–428.
47.
RothP. L, & BeVierC. A. (1998). Response rates in MRM/OB survey research: Norms and correlates, 1990-1994. Journal of Management, 24, 97–117.
48.
SchaeferD. R., & DillmanD. A. (1998). Development of a standard e-mail methodology: Results of an experiment. Public Opinion Quarterly, 62, 378–397.
49.
SchmidtJ. B., CalantoneR. J., GriffinA., & Montoya-WeissM. M. (2005). Do certified mail third-wave follow-ups really boost response rates and quality?Marketing Letters, 16, 129–141.
50.
ShannonD., & BradshawC. (2002). A comparison of response rate, response time, and costs of mail and electronic surveys. The Journal of Experimental Education, 70, 179–192.
51.
SheehanK. B., & McMillanS. J. (1999). Response variation in e-mail surveys: An exploration. Journal of Advertising Research, 39, 45–54.
52.
ShilburyD. (2012). Competition: The heart and soul of sport management. Journal of Sport Management, 26, 1–10.
53.
ShilburyD., WesterbeekH., QuickS., & FunkD. (2009). Strategic sport marketing (3rd ed.). Sydney: Allen & Unwin.
54.
ShihT. H., & FanX. (2008). Comparing response rates from web and mail surveys: A meta-analysis. Field Methods, 20, 249–271.
SueV. M., & RitterL. A. (2007). Conducting online surveys. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
57.
SuttonW. A., McDonaldM. A., MilneG. R., & CimpermanJ. (1997). Creating and fostering fan identification in professional sports. Sport Marketing Quarterly, 6, 15–22.
58.
TurnerB. A., JordanJ. S., & SagasM. (2006). Factors affecting response rates in survey research: The case of intercollegiate coaches. Applied Research in Coaching and Athletics Annual, 21, 211–237.
59.
WannD., & BranscombeN. (1993). Sports fans: Measuring degree of identification with their team. Journal of Sport Psychology, 24, 1–17.
60.
WestrickS. C., & MountJ. K. (2008). Effects of repeated callbacks on response rate and nonresponse bias: Results from a 17-state pharmacy survey. Research in Social and Administrative Pharmacy, 4, 46–58.
