Data Collection Technique

The collection of data involved a self-administered online and paper-based questionnaire. Due the fact that the population of interest consisted strictly of internet users and purchasers, a mixed-mode or hybrid survey approach (web with mail design) was used (Dillman, Phelps, et al. 2009; Dillman, Smyth and Christian 2009; Parackal 2003).

All potential respondents were contacted via post with a packet envelope containing a paper questionnaire, a personalised cover letter and postage paid returned envelope (see Appendix pp. 362-372). They were given the choice to complete via either online questionnaire or paper questionnaire. The URL address15 for the online version of the questionnaire (hosted via surveymk.com) was highlighted in bold and with a much larger font typescript on the cover page of the questionnaire booklet and in the cover/invitation letter.

13 _{The Office for National Statistics UK categorised adults as being from the age of 16 years.} 14

Due to the budget constraints of this study, the researcher could only afford to purchase a mailing list for single use; i.e. no follow-ups or pre-notification letters were possible.

15

160

Although the internet is a relatively new mode of collecting data, it undeniably has merits in the data collection process. Web-based surveys provide good quality data (Gosling, Vazire, Srivastava and John 2004; Manfreda and Vehovar 2008), faster response time (Griffis, Goldsby and Cooper 2003; Sheehan and McMillan 1999), cheaper and more efficient data collection (Chisnall 2007; McDonald and Adam 2003) and also provide greater convenience for both researcher and respondents (Stanton 1998; Taylor 2000). Furthermore, web-based surveys are perceived as more salient, exciting and entertaining than traditional surveys by respondents who are experienced in using the internet (Evans and Mathur 2005), as in this case, where all the respondents were online shoppers.

However, according to many authors in the field of survey methodologies, the greatest threat to internet survey is coverage error. In this research, as previously mentioned, respondents were contacted through the post, where they were given the choice to answer either the online or paper- based questionnaire; as such, coverage error was not a concern.

In the online version of the questionnaire, the sequence of items measuring each latent variable was randomised (i.e. the order of items may not have been the same for every respondent) by taking advantage of the automatic randomised capability of the online survey software package. This

161

is in accordance with the suggestion of Bowker and Dillman (2000) that randomising items or questions in a research instrument may significantly increase the researcher’s ability to control error by minimising the bias impact of question sequencing (Tingling, Parent and Wade 2003). In addition, specifically related to common method bias, Chang et al. (2010, p. 180) states that:

“counterbalancing the order of questions relating to different scales and constructs makes CMV [common method variance] less likely, as the respondent cannot then easily combine related items to cognitively ‘create’ the correlation needed to produce a CMV-biased pattern of responses”.

However, past literature in the area of survey methodology has noted that response rates to all modes of survey research have been declining over the years (de Leeuw, Hox and Dillman 2008; Dillman, Smyth, et al. 2009). Moreover, as mentioned previously, the mailing list that was purchased for this study was only for single use. As such, pre-notification letters, reminders and follow-up letters to non-responders were not possible. In view of these limitations, several strategies consistent with the practice in the social sciences were adopted to increase the response rate and encourage participation (de Leeuw et al. 2008; Malhotra 2003):

162

 If they preferred to administer the questionnaire using the paper-based version, a postage paid return pre-addressed envelope was provided; i.e. no stamp was required.

 Amazon gift vouchers worth £10 were offered to six lucky respondents. For every completed questionnaire that was returned, 0.50p was donated to a children’s charity16.

 The packet envelope had the University of Warwick’s logo printed on it to create a positive image and to increase the attractiveness of the overall mailed-out package.

 The cover letter was personalised with each respondents’ name. In addition, each letter was finished with a hand-written signature before being printed on official Warwick Business School letter headed paper. The researcher’s contact information (address, email address and telephone number) was also provided. Such inclusions evoke trust in the legitimacy and importance of the study (de Leeuw and Hox 2008, p. 246).  The paper-based questionnaire was designed in a neat, A5

booklet format, so that it looked small and less demanding. It also had a title and was decorated with the ghosted logo of the Warwick Business School (de Leeuw and Hox 2008).

16

163

 Demographic profile and sensitive questions such as income and ethnicity were placed at the very end of the questionnaire, including ‘I prefer not to disclose’ as one of the answer options.  In the online questionnaire, a graphic progress indicator was

utilised to show the respondent how close they were to completion as well as to give a sense of orientation of the questionnaire completing process (following the recommendation of Manfreda and Vehovar 2008, p. 279).  All of the survey material design was pretested17 before the

mailings. Care was taken, especially in the cover letter, to ensure both that the words were understood and that the letter created a positive image.

As mentioned, to increase convenience, the respondents were given a choice as to whether to respond via the paper-based questionnaire (mail- back) or via the web-based questionnaire. Most literature on hybrid survey methods reported a reduction in non-response error (de Leeuw and Hox 2008). Furthermore, the mail-with-web approach may increase the respondents’ perceived saliency of the survey.

The survey packets were posted on the 18th March 2009.

17 _{The complete survey packet was shown to colleagues and the administrative staff in the}

164