Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

CiteULike is a free service for managing and discovering scholarly references - click here to get started.

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
Evaluation Review
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow References
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Right arrow Citing Articles via Scopus
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Collins, R. L.
Right arrow Articles by Mccaffrey, D. F.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Collins, R. L.
Right arrow Articles by Mccaffrey, D. F.
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati   Add to Twitter  
What's this?

Effects of Incentive Size and Timing on Response Rates to a Follow-Up Wave of a Longitudinal Mailed Survey

Rebecca L. Collins

RAND, Santa Monica, CA

Phyllis L. Ellickson

RAND, Santa Monica, CA

Ron D. Hays

RAND and University of California, Los Angeles

Daniel F. Mccaffrey

RAND, Santa Monica, CA

Young adults who had previously participated in a longitudinal survey of youth were sent a questionnaire. They were randomly assigned to receive a $20 prepayment, a $20 postpayment, or a $25 postpayment for participation in the latest survey. Those in the large incentive condition were 7 percentage points more likely to return a survey than those in the smaller, postpayment group. Prepayment had a smaller, less reliable effect. Effects of incentive magnitude and timing were consistent at each month of the study period; only better high school grades distinguished early responders from late responders. Nonresponders had characteristics suggestive of low social conformity and were more likely than responders to be African American and male and have low SES. The discussion centers on motivations for participating in research and differences in the incentives likely to promote continued response versus initial study enrollment.

Evaluation Review, Vol. 24, No. 4, 347-363 (2000)
DOI: 10.1177/0193841X0002400401


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Complore Complore   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
Public Opin QHome page
S. L. Mann, D. J. Lynn, and A. V. Peterson Jr
The "Downstream" Effect of Token Prepaid Cash Incentives to Parents on Their Young Adult Children's Survey Participation
Public Opin Q, September 1, 2008; 72(3): 487 - 501.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Am J EpidemiolHome page
M. M. Doody, A. S. Sigurdson, D. Kampa, K. Chimes, B. H. Alexander, E. Ron, R. E. Tarone, and M. S. Linet
Randomized Trial of Financial Incentives and Delivery Methods for Improving Response to a Mailed Questionnaire
Am. J. Epidemiol., April 1, 2003; 157(7): 643 - 651.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]