Incentives for Increasing Return Rates: Magnitude Levels, Response Bias, amd Format

Mizes, J. Scott; Fleece, E. Louis; Roos, Cindy

doi:10.1086/268885

Cited by 70 publications

(28 citation statements)

References 9 publications

(5 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Results from this study (Mizes, Fleece, & Roos, 1984) found that a $5 incentive using a surveycheck method increased the return rate 19.2% as compared to control (receiving no incentive), although a $1 incentive check did not raise the response rate (52.6% for control, 71.8% for $5 incentive and 52.6% for $1 incentive). This study also evaluated a proactive-check incentive method (i.e., sending a check with the survey as pre-payment/guilt induction for completion) which worked as well as the $5 incentive survey-check (73.7% for $5 pre-payment).…”

mentioning

confidence: 58%

An Innovative, Effective and Cost Effective Survey Method Using a Survey-Check Response Format

et al. 2006

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Maximizing the response rate to surveys involves thoughtful choices about survey design, sampling and collection methods. This paper describes an innovative survey method, to provide immediate reinforcement for responding and to minimize the response cost. This method involves using a questionnaire printed as checks on security (anti-fraud) paper with questions and responses separated using a perforated tear off section. Once a participant completes the survey, the response area is detached from the questions, thus protecting the confidentiality of the subject, and the check is returned via the banking system. This report describes the survey-check methodology, the survey flow process, and the results from four research studies which have used this method. These studies include (1) a technology accessibility survey of parents with children enrolled in a low-income preschool program; (2) a parent report of their child's behavior used as screening criteria for inclusion in a computer-mediated parent education project; (3) a follow-up questionnaire as part of a longitudinal study of child behavior, covering home and classroom interventions, and service utilization, and; (4) a survey of dentists in support of efforts to recruit them to participate in a randomized control trial of tobacco cessation in dental offices. The results of using this method show great improvement in response rates over traditionally administered surveys for three of the four reported studies. Results are discussed in terms of future applications of this method, limitations, and potential cost savings.

show abstract

mentioning

confidence: 58%

An Innovative, Effective and Cost Effective Survey Method Using a Survey-Check Response Format

et al. 2006

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In so doing, the researcher infuses a sense of trust into the relationship with the recipient. Indeed, incentives in the form of gifts or, in particular, money encourage response to surveys, and are remarkably more effective when provided in advance with the mailed survey instrument than as a postpayment for participation (Church, 1993;Dillman, 1991Dillman, , 2000Dillman, Eltinge, Groves, & Little, 2002;Hopkins, Hopkins, & Schon, 1988;James & Bolstein, 1992;Kalafatis & Madden, 1995;Mizes, Fleece, & Roos, 1984;Porter & Whitcomb, 2003;Singer, 2002).…”

Section: Review Of the Literaturementioning

confidence: 99%

What Money Can Buy: Examining the effects of prepaid monetary incentives on survey response rates among college students

Szelényi

Bryant

Lindholm

2005

Educational Research and Evaluation

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study examined the effects of prepaid monetary incentives on college students' rate of responding to a survey designed to assess beliefs and values. It also assessed the extent to which incentive effectiveness depended on such student characteristics as gender, race, and socioeconomic status. The findings suggest that $2 incentives enhance response rates over $0, but that $5 incentives do not substantially improve response rates over $2 incentives. Further, although the descriptive findings suggested that the effectiveness of incentives varied across different groups of students, multivariate analyses identified no such differences.

show abstract

“…Studies focused on the general population [12e14] showed that respondents who receive incentives tend to answer more positively than those who do not. However, other studies [11,15] showed that incentives do not bias responses to questions, so the findings on response bias are still inconsistent.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 97%

Incentives increased return rates but did not influence partial nonresponse or treatment outcome in a randomized trial

Dirmaier

Harfst

Koch

et al. 2007

Journal of Clinical Epidemiology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Incentives for Increasing Return Rates: Magnitude Levels, Response Bias, amd Format

Cited by 70 publications

References 9 publications

An Innovative, Effective and Cost Effective Survey Method Using a Survey-Check Response Format

An Innovative, Effective and Cost Effective Survey Method Using a Survey-Check Response Format

What Money Can Buy: Examining the effects of prepaid monetary incentives on survey response rates among college students

Incentives increased return rates but did not influence partial nonresponse or treatment outcome in a randomized trial

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About