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 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 Cole, S. T. Search for Related Content Social Bookmarking                         What's this?

Comparing Mail and Web-Based Survey Distribution Methods: Results of Surveys to Leisure Travel Retailers

Department of Parks, Recreation and Tourism at the University of Missouri-Columbia, Columbia, Missouri

Findings from existing research that compares Web-based survey and traditional survey methods have been inconclusive. This study compares responses from a Web-based survey and those from a paper-and-pencil survey in terms of response rates, data quality, demographic profiles of respondents, internal consistency of scales, and responses to items among American Society of Travel Agents members. Two samples from the same population were randomly assigned to receive the questionnaire either by e-mail notices or by postal mail. Several differences were found between the Web-based survey and the paper-and-pencil survey. The response rate to the Web-based survey was lower than that to the mail survey. The Web-based survey had more missing data fields than the mail survey. The two groups differed in 15.3% of the total items in the data set. Web respondents’ mean scores to the five scales were consistently lower than those of mail respondents.

Key Words: Web-based survey • response rate • modes of survey distribution

Journal of Travel Research, Vol. 43, No. 4, 422-430 (2005)
DOI: 10.1177/0047287505274655


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

This article has been cited by other articles:

				K. R. Bartkus, R. D. Howell, S. Barlow Hills, and J. Blackham The Quality of Guest Comment Cards: An Empirical Study of U.S. Lodging Chains Journal of Travel Research, November 1, 2009; 48(2): 162 - 176. [Abstract] [PDF]

				E. W. Wolfe, P. D. Converse, O. Airen, and N. Bodenhorn Unit and Item Nonresponses and Ancillary Information in Web- and Paper-Based Questionnaires Administered to School Counselors Measurement and Evaluation in Counseling and Development, July 1, 2009; 42(2): 92 - 103. [Abstract] [PDF]

				S. Dolnicar, C. Laesser, and K. Matus Online Versus Paper: Format Effects in Tourism Surveys Journal of Travel Research, February 1, 2009; 47(3): 295 - 316. [Abstract] [PDF]

				T.-H. Shih and Xitao Fan Comparing Response Rates from Web and Mail Surveys: A Meta-Analysis Field Methods, August 1, 2008; 20(3): 249 - 271. [Abstract] [PDF]

				P. D. Converse, E. W. Wolfe, Xiaoting Huang, and F. L. Oswald Response Rates for Mixed-Mode Surveys Using Mail and E-mail/Web American Journal of Evaluation, March 1, 2008; 29(1): 99 - 107. [Abstract] [PDF]

				K. Kaplanidou and C. Vogt A Structural Analysis of Destination Travel Intentions as a Function of Web Site Features Journal of Travel Research, November 1, 2006; 45(2): 204 - 216. [Abstract] [PDF]

				K. Kim, G. Jogaratnam, and J. Noh Travel decisions of students at a US university: Segmenting the international market Journal of Vacation Marketing, October 1, 2006; 12(4): 345 - 357. [Abstract] [PDF]