{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.02666666666666667, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0038095238095238095, 'mean_word_length': 5.255952380952381, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Low survey response! Can I still use the data?

ABSTRACT Natural resource agencies often use mail surveys to collect stakeholder information. A major concern of mail surveys, however, has long been relatively low response rates compared to telephone or face-to-face interviews. Survey research has largely focused on achieving high response rates; however, in some situations even well-designed surveys can have low response rates. We present an example of a three-page (25 questions) survey measuring opinions and attitudes about native fish management in the South Dakota Black Hills region that received a relatively low response rate (21%) using a mailing, postcard reminder, and second mailing of the questionnaire. We compared response rate and data quality of a third mailing of the full questionnaire with a one-page (five questions) questionnaire measuring key variables to evaluate possible nonresponse bias. Within the total survey error (TSE) paradigm we provide evidence that reliable and useful information was collected by this survey.