Crossvalidation of some psychometric properties of the CSQ and its differential return rate as a function of token financial incentive

Weltzien, Robert T.; McIntyre, Timothy J.; Ernst, John; Walsh, James A.; Parker, James K.

doi:10.1007/bf00752882

Cited by 15 publications

(6 citation statements)

References 7 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…After combining the results of both search strategies and removing the duplicates, a total of 105 RCTs were included in the analysis (figure 1). 10 18–115 The inter-rater reliability was found to be good during the screening of articles for both search strategies (kappa statistic of 0.65 and 0.74).…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 97%

Association between response rates and monetary incentives in sample study: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Jia

Furuya‐Kanamori

Qin

et al. 2020

Postgraduate Medical Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ObjectiveTo investigate the effect of monetary incentive and the dose–response relationship of participants’ response rates in surveys.MethodsThree databases were searched for randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that investigated the effect of monetary incentives on participants’ first and final response rates. First response is defined as the responses after the participant was initially contacted and final response is defined as the responses after several reminders were sent. The potential dose–response relationship of the amount of monetary incentive on the relative response rate (RRR) was established by fitting a restricted cubic spline function based on the robust-error meta-regression model.Results105 RCTs were identified. The first RRR increased by 49% (RRR=1.49; 95% CI 1.29 to 1.72) when monetary incentives were provided. Dose–response analysis revealed that an amount between US$6.25 and US$8 had the maximum effect on increasing the first response rate. On average, the final RRR increased almost by 20% (RRR=1.18; 95% CI 1.11 to 1.25) with monetary incentive compared to no-monetary incentive. An amount between US$10 and US$15 had the maximum effect on the final response rate, with an increase in the final RRR of 34% (RRR=1.34; 95% CI 1.19 to 1.51). There was a significant increase in the response rate when two or more reminders were sent.ConclusionMonetary incentives and reminders improve the response rates. Future studies need to consider providing monetary incentives and sending at least two reminders to increase the response rate and reduce the chances of non-response bias.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 97%

Association between response rates and monetary incentives in sample study: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Jia

Furuya‐Kanamori

Qin

et al. 2020

Postgraduate Medical Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…A total of 22 studies were identified on this topic (Table 25; see p. 164). 157,163,179,182,207,228,232,234,241,244,246,[249][250][251][252][253][254][255][256][257][258][259] All but two were randomised trials; eight were on healthrelated topics. 179,228,246,250,[252][253][254]256 Several involved manipulation of multiple aspects of incentives (e.g.…”

Section: Identified Studiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…157,163,179,182,207,228,232,234,241,244,246,[249][250][251][252][253][254][255][256][257][258][259] All but two were randomised trials; eight were on healthrelated topics. 179,228,246,250,[252][253][254]256 Several involved manipulation of multiple aspects of incentives (e.g. magnitude and timing of delivery); the subsections below reflect the principal foci of the identified articles.…”

Section: Identified Studiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…• some form of incentive versus no incentive at all (19 studies) 157,163,182,208,228,232,241,244,[249][250][251][252][253][254][255][256][257][258][259] (note that, although a comparison of no incentive versus incentive was possible for all of these studies, it was not always the focus of analysis by the original researchers) • financial versus non-monetary incentives (two studies) 182,241 • enclosed versus promised incentives (seven studies) 182,244,246,250,251,257,258 • size of incentive (five studies) 179,234,244,250,258 • other aspects of nature of incentive (two studies) 163,259 • the appropriateness of equity theory and reactance theory in explaining response behaviour (one study). 234 The majority of the identified studies showed a positive effect of incentives.…”

Section: Identified Studiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Design and use of questionnaires: a review of best practice applicable to surveys of health service staff and patients

McColl

Jacoby

Thomas

et al. 2001

Health Technol Assess

582

562

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Most researchers do not approach survey data collection ab initio, but rather draw on "conventional wisdom", often encapsulated in existing textbooks or in what they have been taught at undergraduate or postgraduate level. We thought, therefore, that it would be appropriate to preface our review of empirical studies with a summary of current "expert opinion" and then to seek confirming or refuting evidence from primary research. Sources of expert opinion were key texts on survey methods (e.g. 1,5,13,40 ). These were identified through the personal and institutional libraries of the research team. DatabasesIn our search for primary research studies, previous literature reviews and theoretical articles, we initially prioritised four electronic databases for searching:This review should be reviewed as a guide to best practice, not a definition of best practice. It is a decision aid, not a substitute for critical appraisal of the options available.

show abstract

“…Further investigation indicated that it was highly unlikely that a sufficiently large sample of clients from the preceding 5 years could be contacted to provide a reasonable basis for generating conclusions. Subsequent research in the same geographical area (Weltzien, McIntyre, Ernst, Walsh, & Parker, 1985) demonstrated that at least one area mental health center had a similar problem in locating ex-clients for follow-up purposes. The high degree of mobility of woods product workers, a locally important industry, was cited as a probable cause of difficulty in follow-up.…”

Section: Segmentmentioning

confidence: 99%

Program evaluation as applied to the goals of a psychology department clinic.

Walsh¹,

Wollersheim²,

Bach³

et al. 1985

Professional Psychology: Research and Practice

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A comprehensive evaluation of a psychology department clinic in relation to its goals was planned and carried out. Because several overlapping administrative divisions of the university shared responsibility Jar the clinic and formulated its goals in different ways, an empirical strategy for goal definition based on observation of clinical faculty members and students was adopted-The observations demonstrated that overall, clinic goals were in fact determined by departmental priorities that put training first and research and service in a joint second position. An evaluation instrument composed of five segments was constructed to gauge goal attainment. The segments covered (a) graduate students' evaluation of the training they received through the clinic, (b) faculty members' views of the effects of the training program, (c) the adequacy of the training program as reflected in the postdoctoral accomplishments of former students, {d} community awareness of and attitude toward the clinic, and (e) clients' satisfaction with clinic services. Existing scales were used when available.Psychology department clinics have long been recognized as playing an important role in the development of clinical psychology (Brotemarkle, 1947;Seeman, 1968) and in the maintenance of a sound clinical program within a graduate department (American Psychological Association Education and Training Board, 1967). The effectiveness of clinic programs has seldom been formally evaluated (Harway & Serafica, 1977), however, and although ongoing informal evaluations of both process and outcome variables in the clinic may be a common state of affairs, few, if any, reports of clinic evaluations have been published. IssuesAn important exception is an essay by Harway and Serafica (1977) that articulated several important issues on the basis of the authors' experience in conducting a survey of American Psychological Association (APA)-approved graduate programs in clinical psychology and an evaluation of a psychology clinic. Their principal conclusions that (a) the organization's structure and functional characteristics set limits to the application of particular evaluation strategies, (b) goal-attainment, decision-theoretic, and systems approaches can profitably be combined for the purpose of understanding the departmental clinic, and (c) self-evaluation by the participants of the program rather than evaluation by an external, independent team may be the most productive approach, (p. 656) These conclusions were an important contribution to the planning of an evaluation of the psychology clinic at the University of Montana. The occasion for the evaluation was the appointment of a new director of clinical training for the program.

show abstract

Crossvalidation of some psychometric properties of the CSQ and its differential return rate as a function of token financial incentive

Cited by 15 publications

References 7 publications

Association between response rates and monetary incentives in sample study: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Association between response rates and monetary incentives in sample study: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Design and use of questionnaires: a review of best practice applicable to surveys of health service staff and patients

Program evaluation as applied to the goals of a psychology department clinic.

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About