Survey researchers face declining response rates, due to lower contactability and more selective cooperation by potential respondents. Commercial market research companies are under even greater pressure than academic researchers as most commercial surveys do not have high social status. Several persuasion techniques to enhance cooperation have been used in academic surveys, though some of them might be considered unethical. Given the commercial pressures of time and cost, this study investigated the extent to which market research companies favoured these persuasion techniques. A survey of fieldwork managers in companies operating in Australia was conducted, along with qualitative research. It was found that some techniques were unacceptable as they threatened long-term relationships with the public, some were impractical and others were useful, but not for all surveys.
BednallD.H.B. & HallD.E. (2004) Interviewer experience, vocal skills and the recruitment of telephone survey respondents.Australasian Journal of Market Research, 12, 1, pp. 40–52.
6.
BickartB. & SchmittleinD. (1999) The distribution of survey contact and participation in the United States: constructing a survey-based estimate.Journal of Marketing Research, 36, May, pp. 286–294.
7.
BlohmM., HoxJ. & KochA. (2007) The influence of interviewers’ contact behavior on the contact and cooperation rate in face-to-face household surveys.International Journal of Public Opinion Research, 19, 1, pp. 97–111.
8.
BrennanM., BensonS. & KearnsZ. (2005) The effect of introductions on telephone survey participation rates.International Journal of Market Research, 47, 1, pp. 65–74.
9.
BrooksR. (2008) By the numbers: internet data quality.Quirk's Marketing Research Review, 22, 1, pp. 22, 24.
10.
BrownM. (1994) What price response?Journal of the Market Research Society, 36, 3, pp. 227–244.
CurtinR., PresserS. & SingerE. (2005) Changes in telephone survey nonresponse over the past quarter century.Public Opinion Quarterly, 69, 1, pp. 87–98.
18.
DillardJ.P. & HaleJ.L. (1992) Prosocialness and sequential request compliance techniques: limits to the foot-in-the-door and the door-in-the-face?Communication Studies, 43, 4, pp. 220–232.
MannC.B. (2005) Do advance letters improve preelection forecast accuracy?Public Opinion Quarterly, 69, 4, pp. 561–571.
25.
MartynJ. (1977) Fieldwork quality – a client's view.Journal of the Market Research Society, 19, 2, p. 46.
26.
MoskowitzH.R. & MartinB. (2008) Optimising the language of email survey invitations.International Journal of Market Research, 50, 4, pp. 491–510.
27.
MowenJ.C. & CialdiniR.B. (1980) On implementing the door-in-the-face compliance technique in a business context.Journal of Marketing Research, 17, 2, pp. 253–258.
PlocinskiK., BednallD. & AdamS. (2006) Managing contractibility in telephone surveys.Australasian Journal of Market Research, 14, 1, pp. 4–13.
34.
ReingenP.H. & KernanJ.B. (1977) Compliance with an interview request: a foot-in-the-door, self-perception interpretation.Journal of Marketing Research, 14, August, pp. 365–369.
35.
RogelbergS.G., ConwayJ.M., SederburgM.E., SpitzmullerC., AzizS. & KnightW.E. (2003) Profiling active and passive nonrespondents to an organizational survey.Journal of Applied Psychology, 88, 6, pp. 1104–1114.
36.
SingerE., Van HoewykJ. & MaherM.P. (2000) Experiments with incentives in telephone surveys.Public Opinion Quarterly, 64, 2, pp. 171–188.
37.
TourangeauR. (2004) Survey research and societal change.Annual Review of Psychology, 55, pp. 775–801.
38.
van der VaartW., OngenaY., HoogendoornA. & DijkstraW. (2005) Do interviewers’ voice characteristics influence cooperation rates in telephone surveys?International Journal of Public Opinion Research, 18, 4, pp. 488–499.
