Web Survey Bibliography
Background: Nonresponse to questionnaires can affect the validity of surveys and introduce bias. Offering financial incentives can increase response rates to postal questionnaires, but the effect of financial incentives on response rates to online surveys is less clear.
Objective: As part of a survey, we aimed to test whether knowledge of a financial incentive would increase the response rate to an online questionnaire.
Methods: A randomized controlled trial of 485 UK-based principal investigators of publicly funded health services and population health research. Participants were contacted by email and invited to complete an online questionnaire via an embedded URL. Participants were randomly allocated to groups with either “knowledge of” or “no knowledge of” a financial incentive (£10 Amazon gift voucher) to be provided on completion of the survey. At the end of the study, gift vouchers were given to all participants who completed the questionnaire regardless of initial randomization status. Four reminder emails (sent from the same email address as the initial invitation) were sent out to nonrespondents at one, two, three, and four weeks; a fifth postal reminder was also undertaken. The primary outcome measure for the trial was the response rate one week after the second reminder. Response rate was also measured at the end of weeks one, two, three, four, and five, and after a postal reminder was sent.
Results: In total, 243 (50%) questionnaires were returned (232 completed, 11 in which participation was declined). One week after the second reminder, the response rate in the “knowledge” group was 27% (66/244) versus 20% (49/241) in the “no knowledge” group (χ21 = 3.0, P = .08). The odds ratio for responding among those with knowledge of an incentive was 1.45 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.95 - 2.21). At the third reminder, participants in the “no knowledge” group were informed about the incentive, ending the randomized element of the study. However we continued to follow up all participants, and from reminder three onwards, no significant differences were observed in the response rates of the two groups.
Conclusions: Knowledge of a financial incentive did not significantly increase the response rate to an online questionnaire. Future surveys should consider including a randomized element to further test the utility of offering incentives of other types and amounts to participate in online questionnaires.
Journal of Medical Internet Research - Homepage (abstract) / (full text)
Web Survey Bibliography (6476)
- Mixed Methods - Analyzing Open-Ended Comments in a Quantitative Employee Survey; 2011; Lawton, L., Broege, N.
- Changing Survey Methods (Discussion); 2011; Lavrakas, P. J.
- Code of standards and ethics for survey research; 2011
- Causes of survey incompletes: Why panelists say they abandon surveys; 2011; Henning, J.
- Canadian online panels: Similar or different?; 2011; Chan, P., Ambrose, D.
- Blend, balance, and stabilize respondent sources; 2011; Eggers, M., Drake, E.
- Beyond data stability: Rising above quality concerns; 2011
- Background - QSOAP; 2011
- Audience evolution: New technologies and the transformation of media audiences; 2011; Napoli, P. M.
- Assessing personality traits through response latencies using item response theory; 2011; Ranger, J., Ortner, T. M.
- American public opinion: Its origins, content, and impact (8th Edition); 2011; Erikson, R. S., Tedin, K. L.
- Amazon's Mechanical Turk. A new source of inexpensive, yet high quality, data?; 2011; Buhrmester, M., Kwang, T., Gosling, S. D.
- A theory of public opinion. A reprint of a classic book with a new introduction by H. Lee Cheek, Jr.; 2011; Wilson, F.
- Clarifying Survey Questions; 2011; Redline, C. D.
- A new representative standard for online research: Conquering the challenge of the dirty little "...; 2011; Gittelman, S., Trimarchi, E., Fawson, B.
- 2011 Skills for Life Survey: Headline findings ; 2011
- The place for mobile research? Multi-mode studies of major cultural events; 2011; Conry, S., Atkinson, S.
- Facial imaging: The new face of online survey research; 2011; Gordon, A., McCallum, D., Sorci, M., Llewellyn, T.
- How far is too far: Traditional, flash and gamification interfaces, and implications for the future...; 2011; Puleston, J., Malinoff, B.
- The Evolution of Edits in the Canadian Census of Population Online Questionnaires; 2011; Laroche, D.
- The Main Innovations of Data Editing and Imputation for the 2010 Italian Agricultural Census ; 2011; Bianchi, G., Lipsi, R. M., Ruocco, G., Salvatore, M. A.
- A classification of question characteristics relevant to measurement (error) and consequently important...; 2011; Campanelli, P., Nicolaas, G., Jaeckle, A., Lynn, P., Hope, S., Blake, M., Gray, M.
- Hrh remuneration: Comparing wage levels, ranking And dispersion of 16 occupations In the health workforce...; 2011; Tijdens, K., de Vries, D.
- Wages worldwide results and measurement issues from the multi-country. WageIndicator web-survey ; 2011; van Klaveren, M., Tijdens, K.
- Text string matching to measure occupations in web-surveys; 2011; Tijdens, K.
- Web-based rating scales: HTML 5 and other innovations; 2011; Funke, F.
- A Methodological Inference towards the Quantification of Technological Frames ; 2011; Cachia, E., Camilleri, P.
- International Economics, Labour markets and Web Surveys Qualities; 2011; Guzi, M., de Pedraza, P.
- On Affordances and Technological Intersubjectivity; 2011; Vatrapu, R.
- The optimal number of response options in internet panel surveys; 2011; Thorsdottir, F.
- Online Research @ GESIS; 2011; Kaczmirek, L., Lenzner, T.
- Building online communities; 2011; Mlačić, B., Milas, G., Mikloušić, I.
- Romanian financing opportunities for the action; 2011; Moga, L.
- Current Projects at University of Ljubljana; 2011; Lozar Manfreda, K.
- 2nd WEBDATANET Meeting Amsterdam. Global Data Collecting; 2011; van Beveren, I.
- German Web-based Registry for Eating Disorders; 2011; Gross, G., Birgegård, A., Zipfel, S.
- Collecting information with Knowledge technologies; 2011; Foulonneau, M.
- E-dater, Artificial Actors, and German Households; 2011; Hebing, M.
- DIME-SHS; 2011; Lesnard, L.
- Web based Data Collection – A Jungle becoming a Field or a Field becoming a Jungle? ; 2011; Ole Finnemann, N.
- Online Surveys: Past, Present, and Future; 2011; de Leeuw, E. D.
- Vademecum: COST instruments, Core Group Meeting; 2011
- Standard Definitions: Final Dispositions of Case Codes and Outcome Rates for Surveys 2011; 2011
- Calibrating Non-Probability Internet Samples with Probability Samples Using Early Adopter Characteristics...; 2011; DiSogra, C., Cobb, C. L., Chan, E., Dennis, J. M.
- A randomised trial and economic evaluation of the effect of response mode on response rate, response...; 2011; Scott, A., Jeon, S.-H., Joyce, C. M., Humphreys, J. S., Kalb, G., Witt, J., Leahy, A.
- Web Survey Methodology: Interface Design, Sampling and Statistical Inference; 2011; Couper, M. P.
- Globalpark Annual Market Research Software Survey 2010; 2011; Macer, T.; Wilson, Sheila
- Effect of interview modes on measurement of identity; 2011; Nandi, A., Platt, L.
- Maintaining Cross-Sectional Representativeness in a Longitudinal General Population Survey ; 2011; Lynn, P.
- Understanding Society Innovation Panel Wave 3: Results from Methodological Experiments; 2011; Burton, J., Budd, S., Gilbert, E., Jaeckle, A., McFall, S., Uhrig, S.C. N.