Survey research relies on sampling techniques that require data collectors to ask potential respondents to participate in their studies. This type of data collection occurs primarily through the mediums of mailed cover letters, telephone solicitation, email requests, Web sites, and face-to-face encounters. The purpose of this data collection guide is to provide direct, practical ideas for collecting survey data at recreation sites. A theoretical background provides a framework that is followed by specific suggestions for gaining the cooperation of respondents and collecting survey data

Shooter, Wynn

English

Clemson University: TigerPrints

The Journal of Extension Volume 47 Number 5 Article 24 10-1-2009 Suggestions for Data Collection at Outdoor Recreation Sites Wynn Shooter Monash University, wynn-shooter@education.monash.edu.au This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-Share Alike 4.0 License. Recommended Citation Shooter, W. (2009). Suggestions for Data Collection at Outdoor Recreation Sites. The Journal of Extension, 47(5), Article 24. https://tigerprints.clemson.edu/joe/vol47/iss5/24 This Tools of the Trade is brought to you for free and open access by the Conferences at TigerPrints. It has been accepted for inclusion in The Journal of Extension by an authorized editor of TigerPrints. For more information, please contact kokeefe@clemson.edu. October 2009Volume 47 Number 5Article Number 5TOT1Return to Current IssueSuggestions for Data Collection at OutdoorRecreation SitesWynn ShooterSport and Outdoor RecreationMonash UniversityFrankston, VictoriaAustraliawynn.shooter@education.monash.edu.auAbstract: Survey research relies on sampling techniques that require data collectors to ask potentialrespondents to participate in their studies. This type of data collection occurs primarily through the mediumsof mailed cover letters, telephone solicitation, email requests, Web sites, and face-to-face encounters. Thepurpose of this data collection guide is to provide direct, practical ideas for collecting survey data atrecreation sites. A theoretical background provides a framework that is followed by specific suggestions forgaining the cooperation of respondents and collecting survey data.IntroductionResponse rate is a major issue in survey research. Low response rates can result in data that fail to representthe population of interest because the nonresponse is usually not random (Porter, 2004). In other words, "Low response rates raise concerns that members of the target population that return completed questionnairesdiffer systematically from those who do not return completed questionnaires" (Russell, Verhoef, Injeyan, &McMorland, 2004, p. 43). In our culture of increased security and privacy protection, the problem of lowresponse rates appears to be increasing rather than improving (Porter, 2004; Russell et al., 2004).Therefore, it is important that data collectors make appropriate and suitable attempts to gain the cooperationof potential respondents. Data collectors should understand that they are a vital part of the research processand that the decisions that they make regarding how to collect data through the administration of face-to-facequestionnaires can have considerable impact on the conclusions that analysts will draw from the data. Thismini-guide to collecting survey data will provide a brief theoretical explanation for why individuals chooseto participate in a study or not and will provide practical advice for gaining the cooperation of respondents.Why Would Someone Agree to Complete a Questionnaire?There are many possible reasons that someone might consent to complete a questionnaire, but two broadtheoretical frameworks can be used to explain many of these decisions. We can think of those twoframeworks as reasoned action and a dependence on heuristics (Porter, 2004). I will provide a briefexplanation for each of these.Suggestions for Data Collection at Outdoor Recreation Sites 10/26/09 08:09:441/4According to Dillman (2000), social exchange theory offers a suitable explanation for the reasoned actionframework. Social exchange theory assumes that individuals make rational decisions to maximize benefits(Emerson, 1976; Searle, 1991) and that individuals can evaluate the payoffs of social interactions and makerational decisions regarding the consequences of participation in a relationship (Griffin, 2000).When applied to survey data collection, this theory suggests that potential respondents might engage in ahasty cost-benefit analysis while the data collector asks for participation. If the potential respondent is notconvinced of the benefit to him or her, then no reason is established to continue with the relationship, and thedata collector might not achieve the cooperation of the respondent. Therefore, in an attempt to address therational decision-making process of social exchange, a data collector might offer some explanation orrationale for the survey. Along with this, the data collector should be prepared to discuss the study's role inthe allocation of resources and formation of policies that will affect the recreation site that is important to therespondent.Heuristics represent a second framework. Heuristics are simple rules of thumb that guide our behavior. Thisphenomenon often occurs beneath our conscious thought, but can yield considerable influence over ourdecision making (McCammon, 2004; Clement, 1997). As an explanation for survey response, thispsychological approach amounts to normative behaviors such as helping others and/or complying withauthority.Researchers have studied the problem of response rates through the lens of heuristics and have learnedvaluable information about what works and what does not. Because individuals may respond to heuristicsassociated with normative behaviors, simple, well-articulated requests for help can increase response rates(Mowen & Cialdini, 1980). Likewise, explaining sponsorship of an academic or government agency canestablish credibility and informs the potential respondent that the survey is being conducted by an authority(Fox, Crask, & Kim, 1988).On the other hand, data collectors should be aware that they could hinder response rates by overstating thatrespondents' confidentially will be maintained. Most on-site recreation surveys do not ask for sensitive,personal information. It can be counterproductive when the survey does not ask for sensitive information tooverstate the fact that the respondent will not be identifiable and that her or his confidentiality will bemaintained (Porter, 2004). Instead, a simple phrase stating that the survey does not ask for any sensitive,personal information may be sufficient.The distinction between the reasoned action and heuristics approach does not suggest that they are mutuallyexclusive. These two explanations for participation may work in concert with one another. The followingsuggestions for on-site data collection offer an integrated application of these two theoretical frameworks.Groves, Singer, and Corning (2000) recognized the influence of heuristics and, in response, suggested thatdata-collectors "tailor" their approach to each respondent. For example, are you approaching a locallandowner? If so, this person might respond to the norm of civic duty over other heuristics. A clear, succinctexplanation of the study and how it relates to the landowner could be effective in this case. Groves andcolleagues referred to this as " leverage-salience theory" because the data collector is leveraging the featureof the survey that is most salient to the potential respondent. This same example could also engage thereasoned action explanation if the landowner is convinced that she or he has something to gain byparticipating.Therefore, it is important that data collectors are familiar with all aspects of the study. Improper training ofdata collectors can result in biased data (Henderson & Bialeschki, 2002). Know why the study is beingconducted, understand the issues related to the study and the local area from ALL perspectives, know whoSuggestions for Data Collection at Outdoor Recreation Sites 10/26/09 08:09:442/4the stakeholders are, and be familiar with the sponsors of the study. This groundwork will provide theknowledge and mastery of the project that is necessary to respond to unforeseeable situations that are likelyto occur in the field. Likewise, intimate familiarity with the study and associated rationale may supportefforts to enact the conceptual ideas explained above.Logistical ConcernsCarefully review and understand the sampling plan of the study. The goal of the sampling plan is to establisha framework that will guide the collection of data from a random sample of the population of visitors. Thesampling plan will outline a systematic strategy that includes sampling design, timing, and the location inwhich data collectors will approach respondents (Watson, Cole, Turner, & Reynolds, 2000). Attend to thesedetails because they are important features of every study and will effect the conclusions drawn from thedata.Be organized. Make careful field notes of where and when you collected the survey information. Include thedate, time, location, and name of the data collector on each survey. There should be no questions aboutwhere, how, or when the data was collected. Take responsibility for a high level of organization and excellentrecord keeping in this regard. Record additional observations through the use of field notes. Document theresponse rate. Keep field notes about your data collection experience and indicate if one technique of gainingconsent was more productive than another.SummaryThis mini-training guide has offered a brief theoretical explanation for why respondents might choose toparticipate in a study. It has also offered specific suggestions that data collectors might consider whenentering the field. The quality of a study depends upon accurate response rates, and professional,well-prepared data collectors are a critical aspect of study design and implementation.ReferencesClement, K. (1997). The psychology of judgment for outdoor leaders. Proceedings of the InternationalConference on Outdoor Recreation and Education.Dillman, D. A. (2000). Mail and Internet surveys (2nd Ed.). NY: John Wiley & Sons.Emerson, R. M. (1976). Social exchange theory. Annual Review of Sociology, 2, 335-362.Fox, R. J., Crask, M. R., & Kim, J. (1988). Mail survey response rate: A meta-analysis of selected techniquesfor inducing response. Public Opinion Quarterly, 66(3), 608-617.Griffin, E. (2000). A first look at communication theory (4th ed.). Boston, MA: McGraw-Hill.Groves, R. M., Singer, E., & Corning, A. (2000). Leverage-salience theory of survey participation:Description and illustration. Public Opinion Quarterly, 64, 299-308.Henderson K. A., & Bialeschki, D. M. (2002). Evaluating leisure services: Making enlightened decisions(2nd Ed.). State College, PA: Venture.Suggestions for Data Collection at Outdoor Recreation Sites 10/26/09 08:09:443/4McCammon, I. (2004). Heuristic traps in recreational avalanche accidents: evidence and implications.Avalanche News, 68, 1-10.Mowen J. C., & Cialdini, R. B. (1980). On implememting the door-in-the-face compliance technique in abusiness context. Journal of Marketing Research, 17, 253-258.Porter, S. R. (2004). Raising response rates: What works? New Directions for Institutional Research, 121,5-21.Russell, M. L., Verhoef, M. J., Injeyan, H. S., & McMorland, D. G. (2004). Response rates for surveys ofchiropractors. Journal of Manipulative and physiological Therapeutics, January, 43-48.Searle, M. S. (1991). Propositions for testing social exchange theory in the context of ceasing leisureparticipation. Leisure Science, 13, 279-294.Watson, A. E., Cole, D. N., Turner, D. L., & Reynolds, P. S. (2000). Wilderness recreation use estimation: Ahandbook of methods and systems. United States Department of Agriculture, Rocky Mountain ResearchStation. General Technical Report RMRS-GTR-56.Copyright © by Extension Journal, Inc. ISSN 1077-5315. Articles appearing in the Journal become theproperty of the Journal. Single copies of articles may be reproduced in electronic or print form for use ineducational or training activities. Inclusion of articles in other publications, electronic sources, or systematiclarge-scale distribution may be done only with prior electronic or written permission of the Journal EditorialOffice, joe-ed@joe.org.If you have difficulties viewing or printing this page, please contact JOE Technical Support.Suggestions for Data Collection at Outdoor Recreation Sites 10/26/09 08:09:444/4

Suggestions for Data Collection at Outdoor Recreation Sites

https://tigerprints.clemson.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=3785&context=joe

Suggestions for Data Collection at Outdoor Recreation Sites

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

Clemson University: TigerPrints