“A question to determine if they were leafleted or not, without directly asking.”
People who were leafleted but ignored it and don’t remember enough to answer this one accurately is a problem here.
What would you think of: at a college that allows students to mass pigeonhole directly, put experiment leaflets in odd mailboxes and control ones in even boxes. Then later put surveys in the boxes, with different links for odd and even boxes.
Instead of having the links be example.com/a and example.com/b it would be better for them all to look like example.com/gwfr so people don’t know what’s going on. You could generate two piles of follow-up links and use one for the odd boxes and the other for even. QR codes might be good to add so people have the option not to type.
People who were leafleted but ignored it and don’t remember enough to answer this one accurately is a problem here.
Ah my wording might not be quite clear in that section, ideally the question would rely on the surveyors knowledge of who was leafleted and who was not, without the students having to remember if they were leafleted. E.g. if the leafleting was split by college, asking what college they were from.
Then later put surveys in the boxes, with different links for odd and even boxes.
A reason I would push for trying to get a survey emailed out is that a previous study on leafleting that attempted to use QR codes or links on leaflets got an extremely low (about 2% if I remember correctly) response rate.
I am not sure if giving out the surveys desperately later would boost the response rate, I think the added inconvenience of having to type in a web address or scan a QR code would significantly damage the response rate.
Still it would be worth bearing in mind as strategy that could currently be implemented at any university that allowed mass-leafleting, without being able to email all students.
“A question to determine if they were leafleted or not, without directly asking.”
People who were leafleted but ignored it and don’t remember enough to answer this one accurately is a problem here.
What would you think of: at a college that allows students to mass pigeonhole directly, put experiment leaflets in odd mailboxes and control ones in even boxes. Then later put surveys in the boxes, with different links for odd and even boxes.
Instead of having the links be example.com/a and example.com/b it would be better for them all to look like example.com/gwfr so people don’t know what’s going on. You could generate two piles of follow-up links and use one for the odd boxes and the other for even. QR codes might be good to add so people have the option not to type.
Ah my wording might not be quite clear in that section, ideally the question would rely on the surveyors knowledge of who was leafleted and who was not, without the students having to remember if they were leafleted. E.g. if the leafleting was split by college, asking what college they were from.
A reason I would push for trying to get a survey emailed out is that a previous study on leafleting that attempted to use QR codes or links on leaflets got an extremely low (about 2% if I remember correctly) response rate.
I am not sure if giving out the surveys desperately later would boost the response rate, I think the added inconvenience of having to type in a web address or scan a QR code would significantly damage the response rate.
Still it would be worth bearing in mind as strategy that could currently be implemented at any university that allowed mass-leafleting, without being able to email all students.