Web Survey Bibliography
Title The impact of persuasion strategies on the response rate in online surveys: Incentives, foot-in-the-door-technique or when 'even a penny will help
Access date 24.09.2006
Abstract The purpose of the experiment was to investigate if there is a relationship between subjects’ induced regulatory focus and their participation in an online survey which they were invited to with a particular persuasion strategy. The study was conducted in a non-commercial online access panel with about 2800 members. Persuasion strategies can be divided into Alpha and Omega strategies. Alpha strategies promote change by activating the approach forces, thereby increasing the motivation to move toward the goal. An example for Alpha strategies are incentives, e.g. money lotteries as used in our study. In contrast, Omega strategies promote change by minimizing the avoidance forces, thereby reducing the motivation to move away from the goal. This change can be promoted by sidestepping resistance and addressing resistance directly as well as indirectly. Examples for Omega strategies are the foot-in-the-door-technique and the even-a-penny-will-help-technique. Both techniques were used in this study. Regulatory focus can be split into promotion and prevention focus. Subjects with a promotion focus try to achieve positive outcomes. For example, they try to win a game because they desire to be good. In contrast, subjects with a prevention focus try to avoid failure. They try to win a game because they do not want to be bad. It was investigated if subjects having been induced a promotion focus are more likely to participate in studies if the invitation contains an Alpha strategy and if subjects having been induced a prevention focus are more likely to participate in studies if the invitation contains an Omega strategy.
Access/Direct link Conference homepage (abstract)
Bibliographic typeConferences, workshops, tutorials, presentations
Year of publication2006
Full text availabilityNon-existant
Web Survey Bibliography - General Online Research Conference (GOR) 2006 (29)
- Cash Lotteries as Incentives in Online Panels; 2006; Goeritz, A.
- ‘Low social presence’ in web surveys: advantage or disadvantage or both? An experiment; 2006; Taddicken, M.
- How much individualisation does a conjoint survey need? - Experiences from an online experiment; 2006; Tuschl, S., Morasch, N.
- The effect of different kinds of progress bars on online survey compliance and data quality; 2006; van der Horst, W., Snijders, C., Matzat, U.
- The impact of persuasion strategies on the response rate in online surveys: Incentives, foot-in-the-...; 2006; Verheyen, C.; Schuebel, C., Moser, K.
- Online visual landscape assessment using Internet survey techniques in landscape planning and environmental...; 2006; Roth, M.
- Image Impact Evaluation - A new methodological approach with virtual test environments; 2006; Selke, S., Fetzner, D.
- Air refresheners online? Validity check of an Internet online sample using external reference data; 2006; Starsetzki, T., Lehmann, G.
- Online Evaluation Survey; 2006; Strzoda, C.
- Online Survey Response Patterns; 2006; Sutton A., Hopkins Burke, K.
- Does the Collection of Ego-Centered Network Data on the Web reduce the Data Quality? An Experimental...; 2006; Matzat, U., Snijders, C.
- Optimizing open-ended questions in online questionnaires for measuring price perception and willingness...; 2006; Melles, T., Ellers, G.
- Ranking vs. Rating in an online Environment; 2006; Neubarth, W.
- Online Recruiting on Internet pages New Solution for On Exit Recruitment on WebSites; 2006; Otto, P.
- Online Conjoint Analysis: The faster, the worse?; 2006; Puetzfeld, S., Melles, T.
- Web survey on transition from university to work: measuring the marginal effect mode; 2006; D'Agostino, A., Quintano, C., Castellano, R.
- Qualitative research online: Self-reported pros and cons of being chat-interviewed online with web cameras...; 2006; Davidovich, U., Uhr, H.
- Visual Analogue Scales: Non-linear Data Categorization by Transformation with Reduced Extremes; 2006; Funke, F., Reips, U. -D.
- Response Biases in Online Surveys; 2006; Galesic, M., Bosnjak, M.
- Using Instant Messaging for Internet-based interviews; 2006; Goeritz, A., Stieger, S.
- A online-offline method comparison based on quasi-experimental data from two surveys to family stress...; 2006; Haenggi, Y., Heldner, C.
- Hybrid Methods in Market Research - Learnings and Limits; 2006; Helmold, D., Kohlmann, U.
- The impact of visualization of question types and screen pages on the answering behaviour in online...; 2006; Hemsing, W., Hellwig, O.
- Specific Demands of Longitudinal Online-Surveys; 2006; Kahnwald, N., Koehler, T.
- A Comparison of the validity of a paper based and an online Conjoint Analysis; 2006; Klein, A., Scheffold, K.
- Determinants of Response Rates of Online Surveys - The Anita Effect - Results of a Joint Project; 2006; Althoff, S., Greif, V., Griel, B., Batinic, B.
- Technical opportunities for automation and integration of online surveys in business processes; 2006; Batinic, B.
- Personality traits and participation in an online access panel; 2006; Galesic, M., Bosnjak, M.