Does it Pay to Send Multiple Pre-Paid Incentives? Evidence from a Randomized Experiment

Andrew C. Chang, Joanne W. Hsu, Eva Ma, Kate Bachtell, Micah Sjoblom
{"title":"Does it Pay to Send Multiple Pre-Paid Incentives? Evidence from a Randomized Experiment","authors":"Andrew C. Chang, Joanne W. Hsu, Eva Ma, Kate Bachtell, Micah Sjoblom","doi":"10.17016/feds.2024.023","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"To encourage survey participation and improve sample representativeness, the Survey of Consumer Finances (SCF) offers an unconditional pre-paid monetary incentive and separate post-paid incentive upon survey completion. We conducted a pre-registered between-subject randomized control experiment within the 2022 SCF, with at least 1,200 households per experimental group, to examine whether changing the pre-paid incentive structure affects survey outcomes. We assess the effects of: (1) altering the total dollar value of the pre-paid incentive (“incentive effect”), (2) giving two identical pre-paid incentives holding the total dollar value fixed (“reminder effect”), and (3) offering multiple pre-paid incentives of different amounts holding the total dollar value fixed (“slope effect”) on survey response rates, interviewer burden, and data quality. Our evidence indicates that a single $15 pre-paid incentive increases response rates and maintains similar levels of interviewer burden and data quality, relative to a single $5 pre-paid incentive. Splitting the $15 into two pre-paid incentives of different amounts increases interviewer burden though lengthening time in the field without improving response rates, reducing the number of contact attempts needed for a response, or improving data quality, regardless of whether the first pre-paid is larger or smaller than the second.","PeriodicalId":496709,"journal":{"name":"Finance and economics discussion series","volume":"75 10","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Finance and economics discussion series","FirstCategoryId":"0","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.17016/feds.2024.023","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

To encourage survey participation and improve sample representativeness, the Survey of Consumer Finances (SCF) offers an unconditional pre-paid monetary incentive and separate post-paid incentive upon survey completion. We conducted a pre-registered between-subject randomized control experiment within the 2022 SCF, with at least 1,200 households per experimental group, to examine whether changing the pre-paid incentive structure affects survey outcomes. We assess the effects of: (1) altering the total dollar value of the pre-paid incentive (“incentive effect”), (2) giving two identical pre-paid incentives holding the total dollar value fixed (“reminder effect”), and (3) offering multiple pre-paid incentives of different amounts holding the total dollar value fixed (“slope effect”) on survey response rates, interviewer burden, and data quality. Our evidence indicates that a single $15 pre-paid incentive increases response rates and maintains similar levels of interviewer burden and data quality, relative to a single $5 pre-paid incentive. Splitting the $15 into two pre-paid incentives of different amounts increases interviewer burden though lengthening time in the field without improving response rates, reducing the number of contact attempts needed for a response, or improving data quality, regardless of whether the first pre-paid is larger or smaller than the second.
发送多个预付奖励是否值得?来自随机试验的证据
为了鼓励参与调查并提高样本的代表性,消费者财务状况调查(SCF)在调查完成后提供无条件的预付货币奖励和单独的后付奖励。我们在 2022 年 SCF 调查范围内进行了一次预先登记的受试者间随机对照实验,每个实验组至少有 1200 个家庭参与,以检验改变预付费激励结构是否会影响调查结果。我们评估了以下措施的效果(1)改变预付费激励措施的总金额("激励效应");(2)在总金额固定的情况下,提供两种相同的预付费激励措施("提醒效应");(3)在总金额固定的情况下,提供多种不同金额的预付费激励措施("斜率效应")对调查回复率、访问员负担和数据质量的影响。我们的证据表明,与单一的 5 美元预付费激励相比,单一的 15 美元预付费激励能够提高回 复率,并保持相似的访问者负担水平和数据质量。将 15 美元分成两个不同金额的预付费激励措施会增加访谈员的负担,延长在现场的时间,但无论第一个预付费激励措施的金额比第二个预付费激励措施的金额大还是小,都不会提高回复率、减少回复所需的联系次数或改善数据质量。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信