Response Rates and Response Content in Mail Versus Face-To-Face Surveys

Abstract

Two surveys were administered based on the same area probability sampling frame and with some of the same questions: one sample was used for hour-long face-to-face interviewing in the 1992 Detroit Area Study; the other sample received a much shorter questionnaire in the mail for self-administration. The sample segments had previously been stratified in terms of the percentage that was black. For the predominantly white stratum, there was only a small difference in response rates due to mode of administration. For the predominantly black stratum, the mail survey obtained a considerably lower response rate then the face-to-face survey. Within the predominantly white stratum, there were no clear differences between results for the two modes of administration in demographic variables or in gross housing characteristics. However, the mail survey respondents expressed more negative attitudes toward racial integration and affirmative action than did the face-to-face respondents. Because the mail sample of the predominantly black stratum was small, it was not possible to carry out similar analyses of demographic or attitudinal differences, or to determine whether its lower response rate was due mainly to race, to correlates of race such as income MARIA KRYSAN is a doctoral student in sociology at the University of Michigan. HOWARD SCHUMAN is a research scientist in the Institute for Social Research and professor of sociology at the University of Michigan. LESLI JO SCOTT iS manager of the telephone facility at the Survey Research Center in the Institute for Social Research. PAUL BEATTY is a survey statistician at the Office of Research and Methodology at the National Center for Health Statistics. The authors wish to acknowledge advice and help from Charlotte Steeh (1992 Detroit Area Study director), Reynolds Farley (1992 Detroit Area Study faculty investigator), Michelle Mueller, and several other individuals connected with the 1992 Detroit Area Study. They received a number of useful comments on an earlier draft from Don Dillman. Willard Rodgers and James Lepkowski provided valuable assistance on calculating cluster effects. A grant to Howard Schuman from the National Science Foundation (SES-9212590) funded the mail survey component of this research. Funding for the 1992 Detroit Area Study came from the Ford Foundation, the Russell Sage Foundation, and the University of Michigan. Public Opinion Quarterly Volume 58:381-399 ? 1994 by the American Association for Public Opinion Research All rights reserved. 0033-362X/94/5803-0005$02.50 This content downloaded from 207.46.13.25 on Mon, 12 Sep 2016 04:52:57 UTC All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms 382 Krysan, Schuman, Scott, and Beatty or education, or even to problems with mail delivery in central cities.