Don’t want

Format

References

Origin

Bennett, L., & Nair, C. S. (2009). A recipe for effective participation rates for web-based
surveys. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 35(4), 357-365.
[Link]

● Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative
Research in Psychology, 3(2), 77–101. [Link]

Bryman, A. (2016). Social research methods (5th ed.). Oxford University Press.

Creswell, J. W., & Creswell, J. D. (2018). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and
mixed methods approaches (5th ed.). SAGE Publications.

● Creswell, J. W., & Plano Clark, V. L. (2017). Designing and conducting mixed
methods research (3rd ed.). SAGE Publications.
● Dillman, D. A., Smyth, J. D., & Christian, L. M. (2014). Internet, phone, mail, and
mixed-mode surveys: The tailored design method (4th ed.). Wiley.

Easterby-Smith, M., Thorpe, R., & Jackson, P. R. (2018). Management and business
research (6th ed.). SAGE Publications.

Estelami, H. (2014). The Effects of Survey Timing on Student Evaluation of Teaching

Measures Obtained Using Online Surveys. Journal of Marketing Education, 37(1), 54-64.
[Link]

● Etikan, I., Musa, S. A., & Alkassim, R. S. (2016). Comparison of convenience

sampling and purposive sampling. American Journal of Theoretical and Applied
Statistics, 5(1), 1–4. [Link]

Field, A. (2020). Survey fatigue and the tragedy of the commons: Are we undermining our
evaluation practice? Evaluation Matters—He Take Tō Te Aromatawai, 6, 21–28. New
Zealand Council for Educational Research.
[Link]

Galesic, M., & Bosnjak, M. (2009). Effects of questionnaire length on participation and
indicators of response quality in a web survey. Public Opinion Quarterly, 73(2), 349–360.

Groves, R. M., Fowler, F. J., Couper, M. P., Lepkowski, J. M., Singer, E., & Tourangeau, R.
(2009). Survey methodology (2nd ed.). Wiley.
 Health Research Council of New Zealand. (2010). Guidelines for researchers on health
research involving Māori. HRC NZ.

Herzog, A. R., & Bachman, J. G. (1981). Effects of questionnaire length on response

quality. Public Opinion Quarterly, 45(4), 549–559.

● Holbrook, A. L., Green, M. C., & Krosnick, J. A. (2003). Telephone versus face-to-
face interviewing of national probability samples with long questionnaires. Public
Opinion Quarterly, 67(1), 79–125. [Link]

Homans, G. C. (1958). Social behavior as exchange. American Journal of Sociology, 63(6),

597–606.

Krosnick, J. A. (1991). Response strategies for coping with the cognitive demands of
attitude measures in surveys. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 5(3), 213–236.

● Massey University. (2017). Code of ethical conduct for research, teaching and
evaluations involving human participants. Massey University.
[Link]
hing_Evaluations_Involving_Human_Participants.pdf
● Porter, S. R., & Umbach, P. D. (2006). Student survey response rates across
institutions: Why they vary and what we can do. Research in Higher Education,
47(2), 229–247. [Link]

Porter, S. R., Whitcomb, M. E., & Weitzer, W. H. (2004). Multiple surveys of students and
survey fatigue. New Directions for Institutional Research, 2004(121), 63–73.
[Link]

● Resnik, D. B. (2018). The ethics of research with human subjects: Protecting

people, advancing science, promoting trust. Springer.

Rogelberg, S. G., & Stanton, J. M. (2007). Understanding and dealing with organizational
survey nonresponse. Organizational Research Methods, 10(2), 195–209.

Saunders, M., Lewis, P., & Thornhill, A. (2016). Research methods for business students
(7th ed.). Pearson Education.

● Sax, L. J., Gilmartin, S. K., & Bryant, A. N. (2003). Assessing response rates and
nonresponse bias in web and paper surveys. Research in Higher Education, 44(4),
409–432.
● Sharp, L. M., & Frankel, J. (1983). Respondent burden: A test of some common
assumptions. Public Opinion Quarterly, 47(1), 36–53.

Singer, E., & Ye, C. (2013). The use and effects of incentives in surveys. The ANNALS of
the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 645(1), 112–141.
[Link]

Sweller, J. (1988). Cognitive load during problem solving: Effects on learning. Cognitive
Science, 12(2), 257–285. [Link]

Terry, S., Moskal, A., McGlashan, R., Stein, S., & Stuart, F. (2020). Student perceptions of
student evaluations: Enabling student voice and meaningful engagement (Report). Ako
Aotearoa. [Link]
 ● Tourangeau, R., Conrad, F. G., & Couper, M. P. (2013). The science of web
surveys. Oxford University Press.
● Universities New Zealand. (2018). Code of Ethical Conduct for Research, Teaching
and Evaluations Involving Human Participants. Wellington: Universities NZ.

University of Bath. (n.d.). Guidance on surveying students. University of Bath.

[Link]

Chapter 1 INTRO

● Burange, P., & Gaikwad, S. (2024). Harnessing customer feedback: A strategic

approach to business success. International Journal of Advanced Research in
Science, Communication and Technology, 4(3).
● University of Auckland. (n.d.). Student Survey Policy and Procedures. University of
Auckland.

Pusker, M., Takács, S., & Takács, R. (2025). Student evaluation of teaching prior, during
and after the COVID-19 pandemic. Frontiers in Education, 10.
[Link]

Huebner, L. A., & Zacher, H. (2021). Following Up on Employee Surveys: A Conceptual

Framework and Systematic Review. Frontiers in psychology, 12, 801073.
[Link]

● University of Auckland. (n.d.). BUSINESS 705: Qualitative Research Methods —

Course outline. University of Auckland.
[Link]

● University of Auckland. (n.d.). SOCWORK 312: Applied Social Research — Course

outline. University of Auckland.
[Link]

● Massey University. (n.d.). Marketing Research — Course description. Massey

University. [Link]

Keusch, F., Bähr, S., Haas, G.-C., Kreuter, F., Trappmann, M., & Eckman, S. (2022).
Non-participation in smartphone data collection using research apps. Journal of the Royal
Statistical Society: Series A (Statistics in Society), 185(S2), 225–245.
DOI:10.1111/rssa.12827

Pathiravasan, C. H., Zhang, Y., Trinquart, L., Benjamin, E. J., Borrelli, B., McManus, D. D.,
Kheterpal, V., Lin, H., Sardana, M., Hammond, M. M., Spartano, N. L., Dunn, A. L.,
Schramm, E., Nowak, C., Manders, E. S., Liu, H., Kornej, J., Liu, C., & Murabito, J. M.
(2021). Adherence of Mobile App-Based Surveys and Comparison With Traditional Surveys:
eCohort Study. Journal of medical Internet research, 23(1), e24773.
[Link]

Anderies, A., Agustina, C., Lipiena, T., Raaziqi, A., & Gunawan, A. A. S. (2023). User
Experience Analysis of Duolingo Using User Experience Questionnaire. Engineering,
MAthematics and Computer Science Journal (EMACS), 5(3), 155–159.
[Link]

—Intro iPad note

Purewal, S., Ardiles, P., Di Ruggiero, E., Flores, J. V. L., Mahmood, S., & Elhagehassan, H.
(2021). Using Social Media as a Survey Recruitment Strategy for Post-Secondary Students
During the COVID-19 Pandemic. INQUIRY: The Journal of Health Care Organization,
Provision, and Financing. 2021;58. [Link]

Krosnick, J. A. (1991). Response strategies for coping with the cognitive demands of attitude
measures in surveys. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 5(3), 213–236.
[Link]

Chandler, J., Paolacci, G., Peer, E., Mueller, P., & Ratliff, K. A. (2015). Using Nonnaive
Participants Can Reduce Effect Sizes. Psychological Science, 26(7), 1131-1139.
[Link]

Krosnick, J. A., & Alwin, D. F. (1987). An evaluation of a cognitive theory of response-order

effects in survey measurement. Public Opinion Quarterly, 51(1), 115-119.
[Link]

Spronken-Smith, R. (2008). Experiencing the Process of Knowledge Creation: The Nature

and Use of Inquiry-Based Learning in Higher Education. Ako Aotearoa.
[Link]
[Link]

Camacho, M., Valcke, M., & Chiluiza, K. (2017). Research-based learning in higher
education: A review of literature. In INTED2017 Proceedings (pp. 4188-4197). 11th
International Technology, Education and Development Conference.
[Link]

Chapter 2:

Peer driven:

Laursen, B., & Veenstra, R. (2021)Toward understanding the functions of peer influence: A
summary and synthesis of recent empirical research. Journal of Research on Adolescence,
31(4), 889-907. [Link]

● Asch, S. E. (1951). Effects of group pressure upon the modification and distortion of
judgments. In H. Guetzkow (Ed.), Groups, leadership and men; research in human
relations (pp. 177–190). Carnegie Press.

Choukas-Bradley, S., Giletta, M., Cohen, G. L., & Prinstein, M. J. (2015). Peer Influence,
Peer Status, and Prosocial Behavior: An Experimental Investigation of Peer Socialization of
Adolescents' Intentions to Volunteer. Journal of youth and adolescence, 44(12), 2197–2210.
[Link]

Rahal, D., Shaw, S.T., Tucker, M.C., & Stigler, J. W. (2024). Status in a psychological
statistics class: The role of academic and status-based identities in college students’
subjective social status. Soc Psychol Educ 27, 1921–1946. [Link]
024-09885-4

International

Bennett, L., & Nair, S. (2010). A recipe for effective participation rates for web-based
surveys. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 35(4), 357–365.
[Link]

Halper, L. R., Szeyller, E., Freggens, M. J., Edmunds, C., & Regan, E. P. (2025). Data-
Driven Approaches to Reduce Survey Fatigue and Enhance Student Engagement in
Surveys. Intersection: A Journal at the Intersection of Assessment and Learning, 6(1), 51–
79. [Link]

Brown, R. F., St. John, A., Hu, Y., & Sandhu, G. (2024). Differential electronic survey
response: Does survey fatigue affect everyone equally? Journal of Surgical Research, 294,
191–197. [Link]

Estelami, H. (2014). The Effects of Survey Timing on Student Evaluation of Teaching

Measures Obtained Using Online Surveys. Journal of Marketing Education. 37(1). 54-64.
10.1177/0273475314552324.

Digital platforms

Tabssam, H. A., Chattha, S. A., Javeed, M. F., & Hayat, A. (2025). Sentiment analysis of
user reviews: Exploring Duolingo and Babbel in English language learning. Frontiers in
Computer Science, 7, Article 1569058. [Link]

● Shortt, M. (2023). Gamification in mobile-assisted language learning: A systematic

review. Research in Applied Linguistics.
[Link]

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. [Link]

Small Businesses and Customer Feedback

Deutskens, E., De Ruyter, K., Wetzels, M., & Oosterveld, P. (2004). Response Rate and
Response Quality of Internet-Based Surveys: An Experimental Study. Marketing Letters,
15(1), 21–36. [Link]

Fourie, L. (2015). Customer satisfaction: a key to survival for SMEs? Problems and
Perspectives in Management, 13(3), 181–188.
Pielsticker, D. I., & Hiebl, M. R. W. (2020) Survey Response Rates in Family Business
Research. European Management Review, 17(1) 327–346.
[Link]

● Kunwoo Park, Meeyoung Cha, and Eunhee Rhim. 2018. Positivity Bias in
Customer Satisfaction Ratings. In Companion Proceedings of the The Web
Conference 2018 (WWW '18). International World Wide Web Conferences
Steering Committee, Republic and Canton of Geneva, CHE, 631–638.
[Link]

Fass-Holmes, B. (2022). Survey Fatigue—Literature Search and Analysis of Implications for

Student Affairs Policies and Practices. Journal of Interdisciplinary Studies in Education,
11(1), 56-73. [Link]

ADDED NZ CONTEXT

Mock, A., & Hodis, G. (2022). Together for good: Aspects of supportive communication
between tertiary classmates that lead to academic success. Kairaranga, 23(1), 50–65.
[Link]

Zepke, N., Leach, L., & Butler, P. (2010). Student Engagement: What Is It and What
Influences It? Teaching and Learning Research Initiative (TLRI).
[Link]
learning-in-tertiary-settings/?utm_source=[Link]

Victoria University of Wellington. (n.d.). Peer support.

[Link]

METHODOLOGY

Cooltool. (n.d.). 6-10 minutes is the ideal survey length. [Link]

minutes-is-the-ideal-survey-length

Qualtrics. (n.d.). Timing question type. Qualtrics Support.

[Link]
question-types-guide/advanced/timing/
Qualtrics. (n.d.). Incomplete Survey Responses. Qualtrics Support.
[Link]
completion/

Chapter 4

The jamovi project (2024). jamovi. (Version 2.6) [Computer Software]. Retrieved from
[Link]

R Core Team (2024). R: A Language and environment for statistical computing. (Version
4.4) [Computer software]. Retrieved from [Link] (R packages retrieved
from CRAN snapshot 2024-08-07).

● Singmann, H. (2023). afex: Analysis of Factorial Experiments. [R package]. Retrieved

from [Link]
● Revelle, W. (2023). psych: Procedures for Psychological, Psychometric, and
Personality Research. [R package]. Retrieved from
[Link]

Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). Lawrence
Erlbaum Associates.

SECTION 1: ABOUT YOU (3 items)

1. What level of study are you currently enrolled in?

● Certificate
● Diploma
● Bachelor’s Degree
● Postgraduate (PGDip / Honours / Master’s)
● Doctoral (PhD)
● Other
2. Are you studying:
● Full-time
 ● Part-time
3. How long have you been enrolled at your current institution?
● Less than 1 year
● 1–2 years
● 3–4 years
● 5+ years

SECTION 2: EXPOSURE TO SURVEYS (3

items)
4. Approximately how many surveys have you been invited to complete in the
past month?
● 0
● 1–2
● 3–4
● 5–6
● 7+
5. Approximately how many of those survey invitations did you complete?
● 0
● 1–2
● 3–4
● 5+
6. Where do most survey invitations come from? (Select all that apply)
● Friends / peers
● Class groups
● Teachers / staff
● Institutional surveys (e.g., evaluations)
● Online student communities
● Other

SECTION 3: PERCEPTIONS & FEELINGS

(6 items, consistent 5-point Likert)
Strongly Disagree – Disagree – Neutral – Agree – Strongly Agree

7. I sometimes feel pressured to complete surveys from other students.

8. I have experienced tiredness or annoyance from frequent survey requests.
9. Survey invitations can feel repetitive or irrelevant to me.
10. Frequent survey requests reduce my motivation to participate.
11. I would be more willing to participate if surveys were shorter.
12. When a survey clearly explains its purpose, I am more thoughtful in my responses.

SECTION 4: BEHAVIOURAL IMPACT (2

items)
13. Have you ever rushed through a survey just to finish it quickly?
 ● Yes
● No
● Prefer not to say
14. How likely are you to skip survey invitations in the future if the current
frequency continues?
● Very unlikely
● Unlikely
● Neutral
● Likely
● Very likely

SECTION 5: EXPECTATIONS &

RECOMMENDATIONS (2 items)
15. How many survey invitations per month do you consider reasonable?
● 0
● 1–2
● 3–4
● 5–6
● 7+
16. What would most motivate you to participate in a student survey? (Select ONE)
● Clear purpose and benefit
● Very short completion time
● Personal interest in the topic
● Incentives (e.g., prize draw)
● Helping peers
● Other

SECTION 6: PARTICIPANT EXPERIENCE

CHECK (1 item)
17. Overall, how satisfied were you with this survey experience?
● Very dissatisfied
● Dissatisfied
● Neutral
● Satisfied
● Very satisfied

Research Proposal
The Impact of Frequent Data Collection on Survey Quality and Satisfaction among
Participants in New Zealand
 1.0 Introduction

1.1 Background
Surveys are widely used to gather quantitative and qualitative data, as it allows researchers
to understand and capture individuals’ point of views and experience as accurately as they
can in a structured way (Bryman, 2016). Yet, surveys’ effectiveness heavily depends on the
willingness of participants to be engaged honestly and thoughtfully. When individuals are
asked to complete too many surveys, they might start giving rushed or careless answers, or
even refuse to participate altogether (Krosnick, 1991). According to Sharp and Frankel
(1983), this decline can refer to the concept of Respondent Burden, which means the
perception of the effort, time, and inconvenience when completing surveys. This problem
has been documented across multiple contexts. In organisational research, one example is
from Rogelberg and Stanton (2007), workers have expressed negative motivation to
complete repeated employee engagement surveys. Similarly, in higher education, Porter et
al. (2004) found that excessive surveys can significantly reduce participants’ response rate,
and the representativeness of the findings. Low-quality responses not only distort the
sampling results but also undermine the credibility of the research itself.

In the New Zealand academic context, the study on survey fatigue among university or
college students is limited and insufficient. Yet, there is evidence that repetitive data
collection can cause irritation in terms of ethical concerns. For example, the Massey
University Code of Ethical Conduct (Massey University, 2017) states a section called
Avoidance of Harm, emphasising researchers should minimise harm, including psychological
discomfort or annoyance to participants.

The problem is relevant and practical to students, especially in higher education institutions.
Surveys are common to gather primary data for assignments, theses and applied projects.
Although peer network is a convenient way to find survey participants, it concentrates the
burden on a limited group who are repeatedly requested. It can lead to two outcomes: (1)
dissatisfaction among students who feel “pressured” to participate, and (2) the careless and
unreliable response due to the dissatisfaction. Understanding these two concerns can
maintain the quality of academic work while caring participants’ time and willingness.

1.2 Objective of the Research

The main objective of this research is to investigate how frequent survey requests affect
participants’ satisfaction and the overall quality when data is provided. To be more
specifically, there are three objectives are seeking:

(1) Explore the level of dissatisfaction or annoyance that students feel when repeatedly
asked to complete surveys.
(2) Evaluate whether frequent survey requests influence the findings’ quality and
reliability.
(3) Provide recommendations on how student researchers can improve their survey
experience to balance the data needs with participants’ perceptions.

1.3 Research Questions

This study is guided by the following research questions:
 (1) How does frequent data collection impact participants’ satisfaction while processing
surveys in New Zealand’s higher education context?

(2) To what extent does survey fatigue influence the quality of responses?

(3) What strategies can be adopted by student researchers to minimize participant

emotional burden while maintaining sufficient data collection?

1.4 Significance of the Study

There are four reasons demonstrating its significance at academic, practical, and institutional
levels. First, as the topic of survey fatigue is studied on the international level, it has been
under-researched in the New Zealand academic setting. Learning how over-surveying
influences the local students will give a contextual information that is reflective of the cultural
values and the institution of New Zealand.

Second, the results may aid student researchers in institutions of higher learning by
establishing the level of dissatisfaction and possible dangers to information validity. This
study will be relevant to the principle of minimising harm and maximising benefits by
informing more responsible, ethical, and people-centred research practices by emphasising
the implications of badly designed surveys (Resnik, 2018).

Thirdly, the research improves the overall validity of a survey-based research. In case
survey fatigue diminishes the quality of responses, it is necessary to address this problem in
order to generate valid and credible results in scholarly projects which depend on the input
of the participants.

Lastly, the research will be able to inform institutions on how to formulate a better
understanding of the expectations of frequency, communication, and consent in data
collection. The study aids in the formulation of policies that will balance the needs of the
institutional research and the well-being of the students by being aware of the ethical and
psychological consequences of a repeated survey request.

2.0 Literature Review

2.1 General Context
As mentioned in the introduction section, surveys are one of the tools that are used widely in
both academic and professional fields, because they allow data to be collected
systematically across large populations (Bryman, 2016). Yet, their effectiveness relies
heavily on the willingness and motivation from respondents. A key challenge over the global
range is survey fatigue, which can be defined as the decline in respondents’ interest, effort,
and attentiveness under the context of responding to repeated or lengthy surveys (Porter et
al., 2004).

2.1.1 Frequency of Data Collection and Its Effects

Scholars note the overexposure to surveys can cause resistance among respondents,
leading to lower response rates, superficial answers, or non-response bias (Dillman et al.,
2014). For instance, Herzog and Bachman (1981) found that repeated surveys would create
less attention, which decreases levels of detail in participants’ answers. Similarly, Galesic
and Bosnjak (2009) illustrated that longer or repeated questionnaires increased dropout
rates, particularly in online contexts where attention was already fragmented. As the online
environment offers more possibilities of quitting and interruptions than the on-site context.

Another important factor is respondent burden. Sharp and Frankel (1983) originally
conceptualised burden as the cost of completing surveys, such as time, mental effort, and
disruption of routine. The later study from Holbrook et al. (2003) expanded this definition to
emotional reactions like irritation or annoyance when people perceive pressure to respond
repeatedly. Those factors can lead to a cascade of consequences: the high burden would
drop data quality, because respondents either skip questions, select answers randomly, or
provide the one meets social expectation rather than practical authentic responses.

2.1.2 International Studies in Higher Education

Due to the academic research needs, higher education settings have been used to study
survey fatigue. As Porter et al. (2004) showed that when U.S. college students are exposed
to multiple institutional surveys in a single semester, they usually present a steep decline in
both response rate and response quality. Similarly, if student-participants perceive surveys
are repetitive or irrelevant to their own academic experience, their willingness would drop
significantly in national education. Beyond the U.S., the similar trend can be observed in the
UK. As University of Bath (n.d.) provided guidance warns frequent or poorly timed student
surveys could reduce participation rates and quality of responses, especially when students
perceive that survey is redundant. Similarly, in Australia, Bennett and Nair (2009) noted that
web-based student’s response rate heavily depends on timing and communication. It
implicates releasing surveys during the busy periods might suffer from low participation. In a
connected vein, Estelami (2014) found that the timing of online teaching evaluation invitation
affects when students respond and how favorably. If the evaluations administered too close
to exam periods or heavy assessment, the more possible to have delayed or fewer
responses, which may reduce data quality.

These studies underline the factors like frequency, respondents’ interest, and allocatable
time can directly affect both participants' satisfaction and data reliability across global higher
education institutions.

2.2 Specific Context

2.2.1 New Zealand Academic Environment
In New Zealand higher education context, the use of survey has increased as the rise of
applied research and project-based learning (Field, 2020). Institutions encourage students to
gather primary data as part of their coursework to foster their practical skills. However, if
heavily rely on peer participants, this can lead to the over-surveying within small academic
communities.

For example, although national surveys such as the Student Voice and the New Zealand
National Student Engagement Survey (NZNSoE) are conducted systematically and with less
frequency. At the class-level, it is not avoidable that students receive multiple peer surveys
requests within a single semester. Unlike the institutional survey that follows professional
standards, student-led survey may lack careful consideration of timing, length, and
relevance, which increase the perception of burden. Research in New Zealand has
highlighted that uncoordinated or excessive student survey can reduce the willingness of
participation (Field, 2020). Likewise, students themselves note that poorly timed or irrelevant
surveys would discourage engagement (Terry et ai., 2020).

2.2.2 Survey Quality and Student Perceptions

Survey quality can be commonly assessed through indicators such as response rate,
completeness, and reliability of answers (Groves et al., 2009). Yet, the research from Porter
and Umbach (2006) demonstrated that in educational contexts, quality is also linked to
perceptions of fairness and respect for participants’ time. When students believe their
respondents are valued and purposeful, they would be more thoughtful (Porter & Umbach,
2006). Conversely, when surveys are considered as redundant or poorly designed, students
often disengage. Evidence from small New Zealand institutions suggests that students
experience more burdensomeness when viewing peer surveys compared to institutional
ones, because they lack a clear outcome or visible benefit (Field, 2020). This reflects the
principle of social exchange theory introduced by Homans (1958), he argued that social
behaviour can be viewed as an exchange, and introduced several propositions like Success
Proposition, Value Proposition, and Deprivation-satiation Proposition. The key point is
people weigh costs like time, effort, and discomfort against benefits or rewards they might
get. When the perceived cost outweighs benefits, the satisfaction and data quantity might
decline and become harder to collect enough quantity.

2.3 Theoretical Perspectives

There are four theoretical frameworks that help explain the relationship between frequent
data collection, participant satisfaction, and data quality. These perspectives converge to
show the frequent data collection not only creates practical stress, but also congestive and
emotional strain.

(1) Respondent Burden Theory (Sharp & Frankel, 1983) suggests that the increased effort
and inconvenience of survey completion would decline the willingness and accuracy. This
theory directly applies to student fatigue in small academic communities.

(2) Satisficing Theory (Krosnick, 1991) proposes that when respondents are tired or
uninterested, they would resort to“satisficing”. It is a mental shortcut to give an answer that is
“good enough”, so respondents can finish faster. It is usually presented by the following
behaviours like straight-kinking, which is ticking the same option all the way down; or skip
open-ended questions; or Choosing the first option without reading the rest.

(3) As explained early, Social Exchange Theory (Homans, 1958) considers participation
decision as a cost-benefit exchange. If the frequent survey is seen as high-cost with low
return, the satisfaction would decrease.

(4) The last theory is Cognitive Load Theory (Sweller, 1988), which argues that individuals
have limited mental capacity. In this case, frequent surveys may add to cognitive and mental
load, especially during busy academic periods.

2.4 Research Gap

The context studies focus on large-scale national surveys or organisational settings across
different nations. Their scopes include but are not limited to response rates; fragmented time
in online surveys; and the poor survey timing(Porter et al., 2004, Bennett & Nair, 2009,
Estelami, 2014). However, it leaves a gap for understanding how peer-driven, repetitive
survey requests affect student satisfaction and response quality, especially regarding small
tertiary institutions. As student-led survey requests may carry various standards, and
consequently, reduce students’ motivation to response. Meanwhile, students in the small
institution might be approached repeatedly by peers rather than official bodies, which results
in more survey fatigue. Without proper awareness of the implication of frequent data
collection, this kind of invalid data wastes students’ time and can even harm their own
projects. Thus, it is essential to explore how frequent and informal surveys affect both
participant satisfaction and quality of responses within small educational institutions in New
Zealand.

3.0 Methodology
To design the methodology and investigate the impact of frequent survey requests on data
quality and respondents satisfaction in New Zealand, this research requires research
philosophy, research strategies, data collection ethics, and ethical concerns. As Saunders et
al. (2016) suggested, the methodology section should clearly outline what is being done,
why it is necessary, and how it will be achieved to produce credible and reliable outcomes.

3.1 Research Philosophy

According to Easterby-Smith et al. (2018), research philosophy refers to the set of beliefs of
how knowledge is created and understood. It shapes the way of designing questions,
strategy, and how to interpret results. This study uses a pragmatist philosophy, it
emphasises practical outcomes and opens to applying multiple perspectives and methods if
they can best address the research problem (Creswell & Creswell, 2018).

The research problem of survey fatigue and satisfaction involves both measurable outcomes
and subjective experiences. For example, the response retest, participation frequency; and
feelings of annoyance or dissatisfaction. By adopting this philosophy, this study can integrate
both numerical data and participant perceptions without being constrained by a single
perspective.

To apply this philosophy, the questionnaire would be designed to focus on measurable

patterns related to survey frequency and satisfaction. Participants’ attitudes will be captured
using structured rating-scale items, generating numerical values suitable for statistical
analysis.

3.2 Research Method

This study uses a quantitative approach with primary survey-based data collection. As
highlighted by Bryman (2016), a survey strategy can collect data from a relatively large
group of participants for measuring representativeness.

As analysed in the previous section, if participants perceive the survey takes longer to finish,
then they are unlikely to attend it (Galesic & Bosnjak, 2009). In this case, open questions or
the mixed method can be a risk to add into the questionnaire as it requires responders to
take more actions than the Likert scale. Therefore, quantitative methods are selected to
effectively analyse numerical trends across the student population and enable generalisable
conclusions.

Thus, the majority of survey questions will be applied with Likert scales and multiple-choice
items to capture overall responses. Structured question formats will be implemented, such
as multiple-choice items, Likert scales, dichotomous (Yes/No) questions, rating scales, and
checklist formats. These questions allow numerical comparison across students, enabling
stable and objective statistical analysis.

3.3 Data and Data Collection

3.3.1 Use of Primary Data

This study will majority rely on primary data collected through the online survey. Secondary
data will be used for contextualising the research within literature review. Owing to the
existing database cannot answer the research question of current students’ experience in
New Zealand, primary data is necessary in this study.

To collect the data, an online questionnaire will be distributed to student participants in New
Zealand via QR code. Secondary sources on survey fatigue like studies from Porter et al.,
2004; Singer & Ye, 2013, etc., will be reviewed to guide question design and provide
comparative insights.

3.3.2 Sampling

The target population is tertiary students in New Zealand, by applying non-probability

sampling. This method would select participants based on the researcher's subjective
judgement, rather than random selection. Meanwhile, convenience and snowball technique
will be used. These can help to reach respondents easier from the peer network.

As Saunders et al. (2016) demonstrated, while probability sampling presents strong

generalisability, it is often impractical in small-scale academic projects due to time and
access constraints. Therefore, non-probability sampling enables access to participants
efficiently while capturing diversity perspectives. For example, students can be invited via
social network, physical school class, and peer referrals. This increase reaches while
remaining feasible for an individual research project.

[Link] Size

The target sample size is approximately 100–150 participants. The number of this size is
large enough to detect meaningful patterns in survey responses, but reality constrains on
limited time, resources, and access to participants. Porter et al. (2004) suggested that when
response rates below this level often produce unrepresentative findings, reinforcing the need
for an adequate number of responses.

To encourage participants, the survey will remain open for two weeks to maximise
responses, with reminders sent via online during this period.

[Link] Technique
A convenience plus snowball sampling technique will be applied, which is effective in student
populations where social networks are dense, allowing for rapid recruitment (Etikan et al.,
2016).

The survey link will be initially shared with a small group of students who are easy to reach,
then they will be encouraged to share it further.

3.3.3 Data Collection Tools (Questionnaire)

The primary tool will be a structured online questionnaire, which can enable consistency in
data collection, reduce variability caused by researcher bias or misinterpretation, and can be
easily distributed across digital platforms (Bryman, 2016), especially within student groups.

To apply the findings from previous literature review on frequency burden, cognitive load,
satisficing, social exchange, timing, etc. The questionnaire will contain four different
directions:

(1) Demographic questions would collect background information like age, programme of
study, enrolment type. To identify whether the collections differ across student groups, like
data between undergraduates and postgraduates.

(2) Capture frequency and willingness under current conditions by asking questions like
“How many survey invitations have you received in the past month?”

(3) Avoid using open-ended questions from mental burden. Instead, using Likert items
ranging from “strongly agree” to “strongly disagree”, to assess annoyance, fatigue, or
willingness, each individual experience can be into measurable statistics, which can then be
analysed visually.

(4) Clarifying the time needed at the start, ensuring the completion time is approximately 2
minutes and including a visual progress bar. These can reduce responders’ anxiety and the
uncertainty to an unknown survey.

3.3.4 Data Collection Method (Online Survey)

The data will be collected by online survey platforms like Google Forms or SurveyMonkey.
According to Tourangeau et al. (2013), as a cost-effective and efficient tool for students to
access, online surveys take advantage when students are already active and familiar with
digital platforms.

This survey would be transformed into a QR code, sharing via student groups and on-site
classrooms, participants will be voluntary and anonymous.

3.3.5 Data Collection Procedure

As Dillman et al. (2014) suggested, a systematic procedure can reduce the risk of low-quality
responses and improve reliability. It can save researchers workload by minimumising
dropouts and errors.
The procedure involves four stages, that are planning, piloting, distributing, and monitoring
the survey:

(1) The planning stage would overall assess the tasks of each phase for the best survey
results.

(2) The piloting stage would test on a small group of up to 5 students to receive feedback.
This ensures the clarity of words and prevents misinterpretation and confusion before wider
launching.

(3) After the final questionnaire adjustment, a two-week collection period will be set for
participants to response.

(4) After one week, a polite follow-up reminder would be set to increase responses rates
without overwhelming participants.

3.3.6 Data Analysis

Descriptive statistics will present the overall trend on frequencies, percentages, and average
trend. This approach produces objective and comparable findings across participants. Thus,
data will be processed through Excel or SPSS, and analysed by descriptive statistics.
Numerical outputs will be visualised using tables and charts to support interpretation.

3.3.7 Framework for Findings Analysis

The analysis will be guided by the concept of survey fatigue, which links response frequency
with data quality and representativeness (Porter et al., 2004). This framework can back up
the study and ensure that findings are not isolated but connected to existing theory.

To apply this framework, findings will be mapped against three constructs, which are
willingness, satisfaction, and representativeness. This alignment ensures connection back to
the literature and addresses the research question.

3.3.8 Ethical Considerations

According to any research involving human participants requires careful protection of rights
and well-being. Additionally, The Health Research Council of New Zealand (2010) set out
the ethical standards expected in NZ research including the transparency, voluntary
participation, and protection of privacy.

Thus, to protect respondents' rights, there are three components included in ethical
principles, that are informed consent, confidentiality, and minimisation of harm, which
means:

(1) Participants will be informed about this research’s purpose, anonymity, and voluntary
participation;
(2) identifying data will not be collected to respect participants’ right to privacy;
(3) participants can freely decide to join or not, they can withdraw any time without
penalty.
 3.3.9 Time and Resources

The research will be conducted over approximately 12 weeks. This time frame is sufficient
for planning, collection, analysis, and reporting while aligning with typical academic
schedules.

As shown in Table.1, the research plan is the 12-week plan as outlined below. In this plan,
the resources will be: good internet connection, survey tool (e.g., Google Forms or
SurveyMonkey), and simple statistical software (e.g., Excel or SPSS) to analyze the results
quantitatively. Participants will also need to be reached by accessing institutional ethics
review processes and also student networks. The number of human resources is also
restricted to a single researcher and is not unmanageable considering the nature of an
online survey. No considerable financial expenses are expected since no financial resources
are needed to use free online platforms and available university assistance.

Stage Duration Timeline

Proposal finalization 1 week Week 1

Ethics approval 2 weeks Weeks 2–3

Questionnaire design + pilot 2 weeks Weeks 4–5

Data collection 3 weeks Weeks 6–8

Data analysis 3 weeks Weeks 9–11

Writing & revision 1 week Week 12

Table1. 12-week timeline