Optimizing Survey Engagement: Factors Influencing Questionnaire Breakoff and Respondent Segmentation
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.14267/1588970X.2026.008Keywords:
questionnaire breakoff, survey design, respondent segmentation, data quality, nonresponse, Leverage–Saliency Theory, C83, C38, M31Abstract
This study examines questionnaire breakoff – respondents’ early survey discontinuation – and its implications for data quality in marketing research. Using telephone interviews with three independent random sub-samples of Hungarian adults (n = 1040; 1028; 988), we applied K-means cluster analysis to segment respondents based on prior breakoff experiences and atti-tudes toward questionnaire characteristics. Chi-square, ANOVA, and Friedman tests identify the key drivers of discontinuation. Findings show that question-naire length, perceived topic irrelevance, and poorly structured items signif-icantly increase breakoff risk. Based on the results, three distinct respondent segments emerged – Discerning Evaluators, Experience Seekers, and Noncha-lant Responders – each exhibiting different engagement preferences and tol-erance thresholds. Trust in research, age, and educational attainment further shape breakoff propensities across segments. Practically, the results support segment-specific survey design strategies that optimize length, structure, and topic salience while incorporating trust-building elements. Conceptually, the study extends leverage–saliency theory by introducing a segmentation frame-work that accounts for heterogeneity in survey discontinuation risk and is adaptable to multinational research settings.
References
Albaum, G., Wiley, J., Roster, C., & Smith, S. M. (2011). Visiting item non-responses in internet survey data collection. International Journal of Market Research, 53(5), 687–703. https://doi.org/10.2501/IJMR-53-5-687-703
Arce, C., de Francisco, C., & Arce, I. (2010). Multidimensional scaling: Concept and applications. Papeles del Psicólogo, 31(1), 46–56.
Awan, U., Shamim, S., Khan, Z., Ul Zia, N., Shariq, S. M., & Khan, M. N. (2021). Big data analytics capability and decision-making: The role of data-driven insight on circular economy performance. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 168, 120766. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2021.120766
Barge, S., & Gehlbach, H. (2012). Using the theory of satisficing to evaluate the quality of survey data. Research in Higher Education, 53(2), 182–200.
Becker, R. (2023). The researcher, the incentive, the panelists and their response: The role of strong reciprocity for the panelists’ survey participation. Survey Research Methods, 17(3), 223–242. https://doi.org/10.18148/srm/2023.v17i3.7975
Bernhardt, R., & Wunnava, P. V. (2023). Does asking about citizenship increase labor survey non-response? Journal of Population Economics, 36, 2457–2481. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00148-023-00945-1
Biemer, P. P., & Lyberg, L. E. (2003). Introduction to survey quality. Wiley-Interscience.
Brynjolfsson, E., Hitt, L. M., & Kim, H. H. (2011). Strength in numbers: How does data-driven decision making affect firm performance? SSRN Paper, http:// dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.1819486
Bosch, O. J., & Revilla, M. (2020). Using emojis in mobile web surveys for millen nials? A study in Spain and Mexico. Quality & Quantity, 55(1), 39–61. https:// doi.org/10.1007/s11135-020-00994-8
Bresciani, S., Ciampi, F., Meli, F., & Ferraris, A. (2021). Using big data for co innovation processes: Mapping the field of data-driven innovation, propos ing theoretical developments and providing a research agenda. International Journal of Information Management, 60, 102347. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijinfo mgt.2021.102347
Cabooter, E., Weijters, B., Geuens, M., & Vermeir, I. (2016). Scale format effects on response option interpretation and use. Journal of Business Research, 69(7), 2574–2584. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2015.10.138
Choumert-Nkolo, J., Tavera, G. S., & Saxena, P. (2023). Addressing non-response bias in surveys of wealthy households in low- and middle-income countries: Strategies and implementation. The Journal of Development Studies, 59(9), 1427 1442. https://doi.org/10.1080/00220388.2023.2217998
Daikeler, J., Bošnjak, M., & Manfreda, K. L. (2020). Web versus other survey modes: An updated and extended meta-analysis comparing response rates. Journal of Survey Statistics and Methodology, 8(3), 513–539. https://doi. org/10.1093/jssam/smz008
Davenport, T. H., & Harris, J. G. (2007). Competing on analytics: The new science of winning. Harvard Business Press.
Danó, G., Kovács, S., & Surman, V. (2025). Challenges and opportunities of AI in market research: Virtual interviewers. Tér – Gazdaság – Ember: Journal of Region, Economy and Society, 13(1). https://doi.org/10.14513/tge-jres.00413
Danó, G., Kovács, S., & Surman, V. (2026). AI meets marketing research: Vir tual interviewers and the challenges of regional and demographic adop tion. International Journal of Information Management, 86, 102985. https://doi. org/10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2025.102985
De Leeuw, E. D. (2012). Counting and measuring online: The quality of internet surveys. Bulletin de Méthodologie Sociologique, 114, 68–78.
Dillman, D. A., Smyth, J. D., & Christian, L. M. (2014). Internet, phone, mail, and mixed-mode surveys: The tailored design method (4th ed.). John Wiley & Sons.
Dutwin, D., Coyle, P., Lerner, J., Bilgen, I., & English, N. (2023). Leveraging pre dictive modelling from multiple sources of big data to improve sample effi ciency and reduce survey nonresponse error. Journal of Survey Statistics and Methodology, 12(2), 435–457. https://doi.org/10.1093/jssam/smad016
Dwyer, K., & Linton, M. (2013). Unlocking the value of information. IQ: The RIMPA Quarterly Magazine, 29(3), 19–23.
Emery, T., Cabaco, S., Fadel, L., Lugtig, P., Toepoel, V., Schumann, A., Lück, D., & Bujard, M. (2023). Breakoffs in an hour-long, online survey. Survey Practice, 16, 1. https://doi.org/10.29115/SP-2023-0008
Fehrenbacher, D. D., Ghio, A., & Weisner, M. (2023). Advice utilization from pre dictive analytics tools: The trend is your friend. European Accounting Review, 32(3), 637–662. https://doi.org/10.1080/09638180.2022.2138934
Goknil, A., Nguyen, P., Sen, S., Politaki, D., Niavis, H., Pedersen, K. J., Suyuthi, A., Anand, A., & Ziegenbein, A. (2023). A systematic review of data quality in CPS and IoT for Industry 4.0. ACM Computing Surveys, 55(14s), 1–38. https:// doi.org/10.1145/3593043
Grandcolas, U., Rettie, R., & Marusenko, K. (2003). Web survey bias: Sample or mode effect? Journal of Marketing Management, 19(5–6), 541–561. https://doi.org/10.1080/0267257X.2003.972
Groves, R. M. (2004). Survey errors and survey costs. John Wiley & Sons.
Groves, R. M., & Lyberg, L. (2010). Total survey error: Past, present, and future. Public Opinion Quarterly, 74(5), 849–879. https://doi.org/10.1093/poq/nfq065
Hair, J. F., Babin, B. J., Anderson, R. E., & Black, W. C. (2019). Multivariate data analysis (8th ed.). Pearson.
Klenovszki, J. (2016). Az online adatfelvétel. In Z. Veres, M. Hoffmann, & Á. Kozák (Eds.), Bevezetés a piackutatásba. Akadémiai Kiadó.
Kmetty, Z., & Stefkovics, Á. (2021). Assessing the effect of questionnaire design on unit and item-nonresponse: Evidence from an online experiment. Inter national Journal of Social Research Methodology, 25(5), 659–679. https://doi.org/ 10.1080/13645579.2021.1929714
Kostyk, A., Zhou, W., & Hyman, M. R. (2019). Using surveytainment to counter declining survey data quality. Journal of Business Research, 95, 211–219. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2018.10.024
LaValle, S., Lesser, E., Shockley, R., Hopkins, M. S., & Kruschwitz, N. (2011). Big data, analytics and the path from insights to value. MIT Sloan Management Review, 52(2).
Loosveldt, G., Pickery, J., & Billiet, J. (2002). Item nonresponse as a predictor of unit nonresponse in a panel survey. Journal of Official Statistics, 18, 545–557.
Malhotra, N. K. (2020). Marketing research: An applied orientation (7th ed.). Pearson.
Malhotra, N. K., & Simon, J. (2017). Marketingkutatás. Akadémiai Kiadó.
McGonagle, K. A. (2013). Survey breakoffs in a computer-assisted telephone inter view. Survey Research Methods, 7(2), 79–90. https://doi.org/10.1556/9789630598675
Mikalef, P., Krogstie, J., Pappas, I. O., & Pavlou, P. (2020). Exploring the relation ship between big data analytics capability and competitive performance: The mediating roles of dynamic and operational capabilities. Information & Man agement, 57(2), 103169. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.im.2019.05.004
Mittereder, F., & West, B. (2021). A dynamic survival modeling approach to the prediction of web survey breakoff. Journal of Survey Statistics and Methodology. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1093/jssam/smab015
Nancarrow, C., Tinson, J., & Evans, M. (2004). Polls as marketing weapons: Impli cations for the market research industry. Journal of Marketing Management, 20(5–6), 639–655. https://doi.org/10.1362/0267257041324016
NRC. (2025). Hogyan hat a válaszadói élmény javítása az adatminőségre? https:// onlinekutatas.hu/egyeb-netpanel/hogyan-hat-a-valaszadoi-elmeny-javitasa az-adatminosegre/
Nunan, D., Birks, D. F., & Malhotra, N. K. (2020). Marketing research: An applied approach (6th ed.). Pearson Education.
O’Neil, K. M., Penrod, S. D., & Bornstein, B. H. (2003). Web-based research: Methodological variables’ effects on dropout and sample characteristics. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, & Computers, 35(2), 217–226. https:// doi.org/10.3758/BF03202544
Peytchev, A. (2009). Survey breakoff. Public Opinion Quarterly, 73(1), 74–97. https:// doi.org/10.1093/poq/nfp014
Plutowski, L., & Zechmeister, E. J. (2024). Do question topic and placement shape survey breakoff rates? Survey Methods: Insights from the Field. https://doi.org/10.13094/SMIF-2024-00005
Reimers, J. A., Turner, R. C., Crawford, B. L., Jozkowski, K. N., Lo, W.-J., & Keiffer, E. A. (2022). Demographic comparisons on data quality measures in web based surveys. Personality and Individual Differences, 193, 111612. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2022.111612
Reynolds, N., & Diamantopoulos, A. (1998). The effect of pretest method on error detection rates. European Journal of Marketing, 32(5–6), 480–498. https://doi.org/10.1108/03090569810216091
Rowley, G., Barker, K., & Callaghan, V. (1986). The market research terminal and developments in survey research. European Journal of Marketing, 20(2), 35–39. https://doi.org/10.1108/EUM0000000004635
Sandelin, F. (2022). The effects of questionnaire length on response rate, non-response bias, and data quality. The SOM Institute, University of Gothenburg. https:// www.gu.se/sites/default/files/2022-11/2022-1%20Effects%20of%20question naire%20length%20(Sandelin%202022)%20v2_1.pdf
Salzberger, T., & Koller, M. (2019). The direction of the response scale matters: Accounting for the unit of measurement. European Journal of Marketing, 53(5), 871–891. https://doi.org/10.1108/EJM-08-2017-0539
Shropshire, K. O., Hawdon, J. E., & Witte, J. C. (2009). Web survey design: Bal ancing measurement, response, and topical interest. Sociological Methods & Research, 37(3), 344–370. https://doi.org/10.1177/0049124108327130
Stefkovics, Á. (2022). Are you listening? Examining the level of multitasking and distractions and their impact on data quality in a telephone survey. Survey Methods: Insights from the Field. https://doi.org/10.13094/SMIF-2022-00006
Steinbrecher, M., Roßmann, J., & Blumenstiel, J. E. (2014). Why do respondents break off web surveys and does it matter? Results from four follow-up sur veys. International Journal of Public Opinion Research, 27(2), 289–302. https://doi.org/10.1093/ijpor/edu025
Stieger, S., Reips, U.-D., & Voracek, M. (2007). Forced-response in online sur veys: Bias from reactance and an increase in sex-specific dropout. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 58(11), 1653–1660. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.20651
Sundström, M. (2019). Climate of data-driven innovation within e-business retail actors. FIIB Business Review, 8(2), 79–87. https://doi.org/10.1177/2319714519845777
Szeitl, B., & Tóth, I. Gy. (2020). Megközelíthetetlen csoportok elérése: Hogyan lehet javítani a személyes megkeresésen alapuló empirikus adatfelvételek minőségén? TÁRKI. https://tarki.hu/sites/default/files/2020-03/OTKA_kut_besz_megkozelit hetetlen_csoportok.pdf
Vaske, J. J., Beaman, J., & Sponarski, C. C. (2016). Rethinking internal consistency in Cronbach’s alpha. Leisure Sciences, 39(2), 163–173. https://doi.org/10.1080/01 490400.2015.1127189
West, J., & Bogers, M. (2014). Leveraging external sources of innovation: A review of research on open innovation. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 31(4), 814–831. https://doi.org/10.1111/jpim.12125
Yalaoui, M., & Boukhedouma, S. (2021). A survey on data quality: Principles, tax onomies and comparison of approaches. In 2021 International Conference on Information Systems and Advanced Technologies (ICISAT) (pp. 1–9). IEEE. https:// doi.org/10.1109/ICISAT54145.2021.9678209
Yan, T., & Curtin, R. (2010). The relation between unit nonresponse and item nonresponse: A response continuum perspective. International Journal of Public Opinion Research, 22(4), 535–551. https://doi.org/10.1093/ijpor/edq037
Additional Files
Published
Issue
Section
License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
All articles published in the journal are licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC-BY) 4.0 international license agreement and published open access, making them immediately and freely available to read and download. The CC-BY license agreement allows authors to retain copyright while allowing others to copy, distribute, and make some uses of the work.
Users have the right to copy, distribute and transmit an article, adapt the article and make commercial use of the article. The CC BY license permits commercial re-use of an open access article, as long as the author is properly attributed. This license permits, distribution and reproduction in any medium provided by the original work is properly cited.
Suitable reference form: Title of Article, Author, Journal Title, Volume, Issue.
If and when the manuscript is accepted for publication by the journal, the authors agree to automatically transfer the first right of publication to the journal, and permit the journal to apply a DOI to their articles and to archive them in databases and indexes. Copyrights for articles are retained by the authors.
