I am looking for some empirical studies which studied the comparison of short vs long questionnaire and highlighted the disadvantages of using long questionnaire.
One of the disadvantages to apply a questionnaire that is overlong is that your participants will get bored closer to the end of the survey and will not pay attention to the meaning of the items or... will stop at some stage seeing that there are loads of questions to be answered.
The consequence of this is increasingly more missing data towards the end of questionnaire. It could be only partly compensated through rotating the questionnaire subsections.
Also it raises ethical issues such as: Is it fair to 'force' your respondent to answer zillion questions for your research?
What quality of answers are you going to get?
What about understanding the content?
Would you accept a big number of 'Yes' ticking participants?
1) Overall agree with Stephanie...more than 20 minutes is dicey
2) How do you define long vs. short ??
3) There is a qualitative component that I believe should be part of the discussion. I've always been passionate about survey research because a questionnaire designed with elegance will engage the respondent in a compelling fashion....almost like a good story. Its not just about reliability and expected response although those are obviously important. Poorly designed questionnaires or those that jump erratically from one area of questions to another will leave respondents racing for the door in less than 5 minutes.
Survey research is intriguing because it is part art and part science. All things being equal (design elegance, reliability, expected response, etc. ) and adhering to the "Stephanie" rule, I would anticipate no difference in efficacy. Would love to see a test to prove me right..or wrong.
P.S. I've always been partial to longer questionnaires as they have some additional asset value in providing the designer with the ability to blind the survey.