This study seeks to understand similarities and differences in why local governments and nonprofits choose to collaborate, particularly when those relationships are not governed by formal contracts or grants. Exchange, transaction, and resource dependence theories are used to understand the perceived advantages and disadvantages of collaboration as expressed by local government and nonprofit executives. Based on two large, comparable samples from Georgia, the analysis finds that the two sectors demonstrate a remarkable similarity in the benefits they seek from public-private partnerships, but with some key differences. The motivation to partner is driven by a desire to secure those resources most scarce for the respective sector: expertise and capacity for government, funding for nonprofits. Nonprofit executives generally exhibit a stronger undercurrent of negativity toward intersectoral partnership than do their public sector counterparts. This article discusses possible reasons for these similarities an...

The purpose (and perils) of government-nonprofit partnership

We have provided 10 guiding questions and recommendations regarding what we consider to be best practices for survey research reports. Although our recommendations are not minimal standards for manuscripts submitted to the Journal, we hope that they provide guidance that will result in an enhancement of the quality of published reports of questionnaire-based survey research. It is important for both researchers/authors and reviewers to seriously consider the rigor that needs to be applied in the design, conduct, and reporting of survey research so that the reported findings credibly reflect the target population and are a true contribution to the scientific literature.

Best practices for survey research reports: a synopsis for authors and reviewers.

INTRODUCTION As survey researchers, as well as reviewers, readers, and end users of the survey research literature, we are all too often disheartened by the poor quality of survey research reports published in the peer-reviewed literature. For the most part, poor quality can be attributed to 2 primary problems: (1) ineffective reporting of sufficiently rigorous survey research, or (2) poorly designed and/or executed survey research, regardless of the reporting quality. The standards for rigor in the design, conduct, and reporting of survey research in pharmacy should be no lower than the standards for the creation and dissemination of scientific evidence in any other discipline. This article provides a checklist and recommendations for authors and reviewers to use when submitting or evaluating manuscripts reporting survey research that used a questionnaire as the primary data collection tool. To place elements of the checklist in context, a systematic review of the Journal was conducted for 2005 (volume 69) and 2006 (volume 70) to identify articles that reported the results of survey research. In 2005, volume 69, 10/39 (26%) and 2006, volume 70, 10/29 (35%) of the total research articles published (not including personal or telephone interviews) used survey research methods. As stated by Kerlinger and Lee, ‘‘Survey research studies large and small populations (or universes) by selecting and studying samples chosen from the population to discover the relative incidence, distribution, and interrelations of sociological and psychological variables.’’ Easier said than done; that is, if done in a methodologically sound way. Although survey research projects may use personal interviews, panels, or telephones to collect data, this paper will only consider mail, e-mail, and Internetbased data collection approaches. For clarity, the term survey should be reserved to describe the research method whereas a questionnaire or survey instrument is the data collection tool. In other words, the terms survey and questionnaire should not be used interchangeably. As well, data collection instruments are used in many research designs such as pretest/posttest and experimental designs, and use of the term survey is inappropriate to describe the instrument or the methodology in these cases. In 20052006 Journal volumes 69 and 70, 11/68 research articles (16%) used inappropriate terminology. Survey research can be very powerful and may well be the only way to conduct a particular inquiry or ongoing body of research. There is no shortage of text and reference books, to name but a few of our favorites, Dillman’s Mail and Internet Surveys: The Tailored Design Method, Fowler’s Survey Research Methods, Salant and Dillman’s How to Conduct Your Own Survey, and Aday and Cornelius’s Designing and Conducting Health Surveys – A Comprehensive Guide. As well, numerous guidelines, position statements, and best practices are available from a wide variety of associations in the professional literature and via the Internet. We will cite a number of these throughout this paper. Unfortunately, it is apparent from both the published literature and the many requests to contribute data to survey research projects that these materials are not always consulted and applied. In fact, it seems quite evident that there is a false impression that conducting survey research is relatively easy. As an aside to his determination of the effectiveness of follow-up techniques in mail surveys, Stratton found, ‘‘the number of articles that fell short of a scholarly level of execution and reporting was surprising.’’ In addition, Desselle more recently observed that, ‘‘Surveys are perhaps the most used, and sometimes misused, methodological tools among academic researchers.’’ We will structure this paper based on a modified version of the 10 guiding questions established in the Best Practices for Survey and Public Opinion Research by the Corresponding Author: JoLaine Reierson Draugalis, PhD, Dean and Edith Kinney Gaylord Presidential Professor, The University of Oklahoma College of Pharmacy, PO Box 26901, 1110 N. Stonewall Avenue, Oklahoma City, OK 73190. Phone: 405-271-6485. Fax: 405-271-3830. E-mail: jolaine-draugalis@ouhsc.edu American Journal of Pharmaceutical Education 2008; 72 (1) Article 11.

SPECIAL ARTICLES Best Practices for Survey Research Reports: A Synopsis for Authors and Reviewers

Beyond the Contract: The Scope and Nature of Informal Government?Nonprofit Partnerships Essays on

Using self-reported academic cheating from the classes of 1959 through 2002 at the three major United States military service academies (Air Force, Army, and Navy), we measure how peer cheating influences individual cheating behavior. We find higher levels of peer cheating result in a substantially increased probability that an individual will cheat. One additional college student who cheated in high school drives approximately 0.33 to 0.47 additional college students to cheat. One additional college cheater drives approximately 0.61 to 0.75 additional college students to cheat. These results imply, in equilibrium, the social multiplier for academic cheating is approximately three.

/pdf/peer-effects-in-academic-cheating-113fcdi4a7.pdf

Peer Effects in Academic Cheating

The failure of a substantial portion of mail survey recipients to respond to invitations to participate in research projects raises issues of nonresponse error. Because this error is difficult to quantify, survey researchers seek high rates of return to signal legitimacy and reduce questions regarding nonresponse bias. Research on survey method indicates that the design of the survey research process has a measurable influence on the rate of survey returns. This article focuses on three aspects of research design that are expected to influence mail survey returns in surveys of nonprofit organizations: questionnaire complexity, use of Federal Express versus standard mail, and the use of monetary incentives. Using an experimental design, the research concludes that questionnaire complexity and the use of monetary incentives generate no difference in returns, whereas the use of Federal Express to deliver the survey to nonprofit executives has a measurable positive effect.

/pdf/response-rates-for-mail-surveys-of-nonprofit-organizations-a-2g3g8fdbza.pdf

Sarah Wilson

Papers

Response Rates for Mail Surveys of Nonprofit Organizations: A Review and Empirical Test