|
|
|
|
Effect of Incentives on Survey Response and Survey Quality: A Designed Experiment Within the HINTS I RDD Sample |
|
| Abstract | Word Stems | Keywords | Association | Citation | Get this Document | Similar Titles |
|
|
Abstract:
|
The Health Information National Trends Study (HINTS), sponsored by the National Cancer Institute (National Institutes of Health), is a nationally representative list-assisted RDD survey of adults in the United States, collecting information about health knowledge and utilization of health information resources. The first HINTS study (HINTS I) was fielded November 2002 to April 2003. Within the first wave of HINTS I (16,280 telephone numbers), we had 6,905 mailable numbers (numbers for which we had an address with the telephone number). All of these numbers were sent letters in advance, and initial refusals to the telephone contact were sent refusal conversion letters. We experimented with a single $2 bill cash pre-incentive, sent with the advance letter, sending this to a randomly selected half of the mailable numbers. We also experimented with a single $2 bill cash refusal conversion incentive, sending this to a randomly selected half of the initial refusals for which mailing addresses were available. The hypothesis was that a single $2 bill sent through the mail would be highly salient to potential responders, creating an aura of good will. The design assigned one quarter of the mailable numbers to each of four groups: neither incentive, advance pre-incentive only, refusal conversion incentive only, and both incentives. The telephone interviewers were blinded, not knowing whether an incentive had been sent or not (and the questionnaires did not mention the incentives). Our results indicated considerable success for the advance letter pre-incentive: roughly a six-point increase in final response rate. The results for the refusal conversion incentive were less decisive: roughly a two-point increase in final response rate. There was no clear evidence of interaction: the effects were roughly additive. The paper provides confidence intervals and a breakdown of response rate effects at different points in the interview process, and by different types of nonresponse. In addition, we studied differences in questionnaire item outcomes (both general demographic and study-specific) for the mailable respondents that received the advance letter pre-incentive and the mailables that did not, to evaluate whether the six-point increase in response rates had a measurable effect on questionnaire item distributions. |
|
|
 | Convention | | Convention is an application service for managing large or small academic conferences, annual meetings, and other types of events! |  | Submission - Custom fields, multiple submission types, tracks, audio visual, multiple upload formats, automatic conversion to pdf. |  | Review - Peer Review, Bulk reviewer assignment, bulk emails, ranking, z-score statistics, and multiple worksheets! |  | Reports - Many standard and custom reports generated while you wait. Print programs with participant indexes, event grids, and more! |  | Scheduling - Flexible and convenient grid scheduling within rooms and buildings. Conflict checking and advanced filtering. |  | Communication - Bulk email tools to help your administrators send reminders and responses. Use form letters, a message center, and much more! |  | Management - Search tools, duplicate people management, editing tools, submission transfers, many tools to manage a variety of conference management headaches! | | Click here for more information. |
|
|
Association:
Name: American Association for Public Opinion Research
URL: http://www.aapor.org
|
Citation:
|
MLA Citation:
| Rizzo, Louis., Park, Inho., Hesse, Bradford. and Willis, Gordon. "Effect of Incentives on Survey Response and Survey Quality: A Designed Experiment Within the HINTS I RDD Sample" Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Association for Public Opinion Research, Pointe Hilton Tapatio Cliffs, Phoenix, Arizona, May 11, 2004 <Not Available>. 2009-05-26 <http://www.allacademic.com/meta/p116055_index.html> |
APA Citation:
| Rizzo, L. P., Park, I. , Hesse, B. and Willis, G. , 2004-05-11 "Effect of Incentives on Survey Response and Survey Quality: A Designed Experiment Within the HINTS I RDD Sample" Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Association for Public Opinion Research, Pointe Hilton Tapatio Cliffs, Phoenix, Arizona <Not Available>. 2009-05-26 from http://www.allacademic.com/meta/p116055_index.html |
Publication Type: Conference Paper/Unpublished Manuscript
Review Method: Peer Reviewed
Abstract: The Health Information National Trends Study (HINTS), sponsored by the National Cancer Institute (National Institutes of Health), is a nationally representative list-assisted RDD survey of adults in the United States, collecting information about health knowledge and utilization of health information resources. The first HINTS study (HINTS I) was fielded November 2002 to April 2003. Within the first wave of HINTS I (16,280 telephone numbers), we had 6,905 mailable numbers (numbers for which we had an address with the telephone number). All of these numbers were sent letters in advance, and initial refusals to the telephone contact were sent refusal conversion letters. We experimented with a single $2 bill cash pre-incentive, sent with the advance letter, sending this to a randomly selected half of the mailable numbers. We also experimented with a single $2 bill cash refusal conversion incentive, sending this to a randomly selected half of the initial refusals for which mailing addresses were available. The hypothesis was that a single $2 bill sent through the mail would be highly salient to potential responders, creating an aura of good will. The design assigned one quarter of the mailable numbers to each of four groups: neither incentive, advance pre-incentive only, refusal conversion incentive only, and both incentives. The telephone interviewers were blinded, not knowing whether an incentive had been sent or not (and the questionnaires did not mention the incentives). Our results indicated considerable success for the advance letter pre-incentive: roughly a six-point increase in final response rate. The results for the refusal conversion incentive were less decisive: roughly a two-point increase in final response rate. There was no clear evidence of interaction: the effects were roughly additive. The paper provides confidence intervals and a breakdown of response rate effects at different points in the interview process, and by different types of nonresponse. In addition, we studied differences in questionnaire item outcomes (both general demographic and study-specific) for the mailable respondents that received the advance letter pre-incentive and the mailables that did not, to evaluate whether the six-point increase in response rates had a measurable effect on questionnaire item distributions. |
Get this Document:
Find this citation or document at one or all of these locations below. The links below may have the citation or the entire document for free or you may purchase access to the document. Clicking on these links will change the site you're on and empty your shopping cart.
Similar Titles:
The Impact of Providing Incentives to Initial Refusal Cases on Sample Composition and Data Quality in a Telephone Survey
Sampling Young Adults: The Effects of Survey Mode and Sampling Method on Inferences About Political Behavior
A comparison of the effects of four study designs on data quality: preparing for the National Asthma Survey
Effects of Immediate versus Delayed Notification of Prize Draw Results and Announced Survey Duration on Response Behavior in Web Surveys - An Experiment
The Effects of Differential Incentives on Completion Rates: A Telephone Survey Experiment with Low Income Respondents
|
|
