Web Survey Bibliography
Incentives are material and nonmaterial inducements and rewards that are offered to respondents in exchange for their participation in studies. This chapter explains the advantages and disadvantages of using incentives in Web-based studies and describes the types of incentives that are available. Moreover, the chapter seeks to develop evidence-based guidelines for short-term, as well as long-term, use of incentives to attain the goal of collecting high-quality data in a cost-conscious manner. Although a number of theoretical frameworks have been proposed to explain how incentives work (e.g., for an overview of theoretical accounts, see Singer, 2002), the focus of this chapter is pragmatic rather than theoretical. By handing out incentives to respondents, researchers can increase the likelihood of people participating in Web-based studies, and incentives may improve the quality of respondents responses. In particular, incentives can increase the response and the retention rates in a study. The response rate is the number of people who call up the first page of a study divided by the number of people who were invited or were aware of and eligible to take part in this study. The retention rate is the number of respondents who stay until the last page of a study relative to the number of respondents who have called up the first page of this study. Moreover, there is the hopebut not yet many datathat incentives will also increase other facets of data quality such as the completeness, consistency, and elaborateness of participants answers. However, using incentives might also entail undesirable effects. First, incentives might increase the response and retention rates at the expense of other facets of data quality, for example, more items are skipped; response styles occur more often; or answers to open-ended questions are shorter. It is possible that groups who are offered an incentive will answer less conscientiously than groups without incentives because the incentives might reduce the intrinsic motivation to perform the task (Heerwegh, 2006). Howeverat least in offline surveyssometimes the opposite has been found to be the case (Singer, Van Hoewyk, & Maher, 2000). Singer (2002) found that people who are rewarded for their participation would continue to give good information (p. 168). The second potential undesirable effect of incentives is that they might attract a particular type of respondent and thereby bias sample composition (e.g., poorer people may be more responsive than richer people to monetary incentives; Groves & Peytcheva, 2008). The third possible effect is that incentives might actually reduce the response and retention rates by alienating intrinsically motivated volunteers (see Deci, 1971). Finally, incentives might bias the study results, for example, by altering the mood of the respondents (Singer, 2002) or by altering respondents attitude to the researcher. There is the risk that to earn an incentive, people with little motivation will fill in meaningless data to get to the end of a survey quickly. When no incentive is promised, bored people usually abandon the study prematurely, so they are easily identifiable. Moreover, when offering incentives, researchers need to follow ethical guidelines as well as legal regulations (see chap. 16, this volume). Because the laws pertaining to the use of incentives differ across some countries, particular care is necessary with international studies. Finally, in studies with ad hoc recruitment of respondents, incentives might induce some people to fill out and submit the questionnaire many times, and it is not always possible to detect skillful fraud. To weigh whether incentives can be recommended despite possible drawbacks, researchers need to know how large the desirable and undesirable effects are. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved). (from the chapter)
Mendeley Homepage (abstract)
Web Survey Bibliography - 2010 (397)
- Elaborate Item Count Questioning: Why Do People Underreport in Item Count Responses?; 2010; Hirai, Y., Tsuchiya, T.
- Mixed-Mode Surveys and the Internet; 2010; de Leeuw, E. D.
- Do You Know Which Device Your Respondent Has Used to Take Your Online Survey?; 2010; Callegaro, M.
- Segmented or Overlapping Dual Frame Samples in Telephone Surveys; 2010; Boyle, J., Lewis, F., Tefft, B.
- Some Notes on the Probability Space of Statistical Surveys; 2010; Petrakos, G.
- Influence of Outliers on Some Multiple Imputation Methods; 2010; Quintano, C., Castellano, R., Rocca, A.
- The Ethics of Outsourcing Online Survey Research; 2010; Allen, P. J., Roberts, L. D.
- System and method of providing an online survey and summarizing survey response data; 2010; Ryan, C. J.
- The cancer survivor survey: Using Web-based technology to assess cancer survivor challenges; 2010; M., Skalla, K., Onega, T., Anton, K., Gallagher, S., Rhoda, J., DiSalvo , W., Dietrich, A. M.Smith,...
- Use of a Web-based Questionnaire in the Black Women's Health Study; 2010; W., Boggs, D. A., Palmer, J. R., Rosenberg, L.Russell, C. W.
- Reaching Emergency Medical Services Providers: Is One Survey Mode Better than Another?; 2010; Schmuhl, P., Van Duker, H., Gurley, K. L., Webster, A., Olson, L. M.
- Web-based Questionnaires: The Future in Epidemiology?; 2010; van Gelder, M. M. H. J, Bretveld, R. W., Roeleveld, N.
- Conducting an internet-based survey: benefits, pitfalls and lessons learned; 2010; Alessi, E. J., I.Martin, J. I.
- Statistical foundations of cell-phone surveys; 2010; Wolter, K., Smith, P., Blumberg, S. J.
- Epidemiologic Research and Web 2.0—the User-driven Web; 2010; Lee, B. K.
- L’uso di Internet nella ricerca sociale: vantaggi e svantaggi di una web survey; 2010; Pandolfini, V.
- Developing a Research Framework for Usability in Online Surveys: Human-Survey Interaction; 2010; Kaczmirek, L.
- Online Survey Research in the Work-Family Field: Basic Concepts and Definitions; 2010; Lambert, A. D.
- Comparative effectiveness report: online survey tools; 2010; Gottliebson, D., Layton, N., Wilson, E.
- Choosing Between Telephone and Online for Survey Data Collection ; 2010; Baker, R. P.
- Web survey design and usability; 2010; Karakoyun, F., Kurt, A. A.
- Results of Targeting Pre-Identified Minority, Unidentified Non-Internet and Vacant Homes in Two National...; 2010; DiSogra, C., Hendarwan, E.
- Does Providing Internet Access to Non-Internet Households Affect Reported Media Behavior for Latinos...; 2010; Dennis, J. M., DiSogra, C.
- Using KnowledgePanel® to Improve the Sample Representativeness and Accuracy of Opt-in Panel Data...; 2010; Dennis, J. M., Peugh, J., Graham, P.
- Self-administered mobile surveys: Usability and (non)participation; 2010; Scherrer, S., Bosnjak, M.
- Web panels: Replacement technology for market research; 2010; Goeritz, A.
- Social desirability and self-reported health risk behaviors in web-based research: three longitudinal...; 2010; Crutzen, R., Goeritz, A.
- Attention and Usability in Internet Surveys: Effects of Visual Feedback in Grid Questions; 2010; Kaczmirek, L.
- Security and Data Protection: Collection, Storage, Feedback in Internet Research; 2010; Thiele, O., Kaczmirek, L.
- Wie empfinden Teilnehmer die Fragen in Online-Befragungen? Entwicklung eines Diktionärs für die automatische...; 2010; Kaczmirek, L., Baier, C., Züll, C.
- The effect of cash lottery on response rates to an online health survey among members of the Canadian...; 2010; Doerfling, P., Kopec, J., Liang, M. H., Esdaile, J. M.
- Reliability and Validity of an Internet-based Questionnaire Measuring Lifetime Physical Activity; 2010; De Vera, M. A., Ratzlaff, C., Doerfling, P., Kopec, J.
- A Web-Based Versus Paper Questionnaire on Alcohol and Tobacco in Adolescents; 2010; Lygidakis, C., Rigon, S., Cambiaso, S., Bottoli, E., Cuozzo, F., Bonetti, S., Della Bella, C., Marzo...
- Test-retest reliability of a questionnaire for the Korea youth risk behavior web-based survey; 2010; Bae, J., Joung, H., Kwon, K. N., Kim, Y. T., Kim, J. -Y., Park, S. -W.
- Using downloadable songs from Apple iTunes as a novel incentive for college students participating in...; 2010; McCree-Hale, R., De La Cruz, N. G., Montgomery, A. E.
- Designing Web Surveys in Marketing Research: Does Use of Forced Answering Affect Completion Rates?; 2010; Albaum, G., Roster, C. A.,Wiley, J. B., Rossiter, J., Smith, S. M.
- Methoden der Online-Forschung; 2010; Welker, M., Wünsch, C.
- A Study Of Technology Adoption By Researchers: Web and e-science infrastructures to enhance research...; 2010; Pearce, N.
- Nine issues for Internet-based survey research in service industries ; 2010; Wang, H.-C., Doong, H.-S.
- Determinants of Participation and Response Effort in Web Panel Surveys; 2010; Bruggen, E., Dholakia, U. M.
- Considering Mixed Mode Surveys for Questions in Political Behavior: Using the Internet and Mail to Get...; 2010; Atkeson, L. R., Adams, A. N., Bryant, L. A., Zilberman, L., Saunders, K.
- Online-Befragungen im Kontext von Lehrevaluationen – praktisch und unzuverlässig; 2010; Meinefeld, W.
- AAPOR Report on Online Panels; 2010; Baker, R. P., Blumberg, S. J., Brick, J. M. et. al.
- The impact of incentives and interview methods on response quantity and quality in diary- and booklet...; 2010; Bonke, J., Fallesen, P.
- Contact Strategies to Improve Participation via the Web in a Mixed-Mode Mail and Web Survey; 2010; Holmberg, A., Lorenc, B., Werner, P.
- Comparison of Paper, Web, and IVR Responses in the Veterans Health Administration Survey; 2010; Teclaw, R., Osatuke, K., Yanovsky, B., Moore, S., Dyrenforth, S.
- Multi-Mode and Method Experiment in a Study of Nurses; 2010; Friese, C. R., Lee, C. S., O'Brien, S., Crawford, S. D.
- Does the Timing of Offering Multiple Modes of Return Hurt the Response Rate?; 2010; Bensky, E. N., Link, M. W., Shuttles, D. C.
- Response Mode and Bias Analysis in the IRS Individual Taxpayer Burden Survey; 2010; Brick, J. M., Contos, G., Masken, K., Nord, R.
- An Experiment With an Employment Sector Question; 2010; Finno, A. A., Kohout, J.

