Web Survey Bibliography
Title Using a Response Propensity Model to Allocate Non-c ontingent Incentives in a Web Panel
Author Masterton, M.
Year 2016
Access date 02.06.2016
Abstract
This presentation will report on efforts to use a response propensity model to target prepaid incentives in a repeated cross-sectional web survey of college students in Nebraska. The response propensity model will use self-reported respondent demographic data and institution-provided record data – both available on the frame and from prior waves of data collection – to predict response behavior in the administration of the new survey wave. We will then use the response propensity model results to design an experiment using differential incentives that will be implemented in the subsequent wave of this web survey. Sample members will either be assigned to the “standard (uniform) incentive condition” ($20 prepaid) or to one of the targeted (differential) incentive conditions. These differential incentive groups, which will be identified using the RP modeling approach, will be assigned to receive either $35,$20, or $10 prepaid incentive based on the results of the response propensity model. The presentation will first discuss the response propensity model, including the variables included in the model. The focus of the presentation will be the analysis of preliminary response rate data. This analysis will focus on response rates within each of the incentive groups, and the comparison of response rates and incentive cost per complete between those receiving a targeted incentive and those receiving a uniform incentive. We will also use demographic data available on the frame to compare the demographic distribution of respondents from both the experimental and control treatments.
Access/Direct link Conference Homepage (abstract)
Year of publication2016
Bibliographic typeConferences, workshops, tutorials, presentations
Web survey bibliography - Measurement (1822)
- Displaying Videos in Web Surveys: Implications for Complete Viewing and Survey Responses; 2017; Mendelson, J.; Lee Gibson, J.; Romano Bergstrom, J. C.
- Careless Response and Attrition as Sources of Bias in Online Survey Assessments of Personality Traits...; 2017; Meade, A. W.; Ward, M. K.; Alfred, C. M.; Pappalardo, G.; Stoughton, J. W.
- An experimental comparison of web-push vs. paper-only survey procedures for conducting an in-depth health...; 2017; McMaster, H. S.; LeardMann, C. A.; Speigle, S.; Dillman, D. A.
- Demographic Question Placement: Effect on Item Response Rates and Means of a Veterans Health Administration...; 2017; Teclaw, R.; Price, M.; Osatuke, K.
- Effects of Applying Multimedia and Dialogue Box to Web Survey Design; 2017; Chen, H.
- Role of online survey tools in creating temporally accurate Environmental Product Declarations (EPD)...; 2017; Ganguly, I.; Bowers, T.; Pierobon, F.; Eastin, I.
- A test of sample matching using a pseudo-web sample; 2017; Chatrchi, G., Gambino, J.
- A Partially Successful Attempt to Integrate a Web-Recruited Cohort into an Address-Based Sample; 2017; Kott, P. S., Farrelly, M., Kamyab, K.
- Nonprobability sampling as model construction; 2017; Mercer, A. W.
- Mobile Research im Kontext der digitalen Transformation; 2017; Friedrich-Freksa, M.
- Kognitives Pretesting; 2017; Neuert, C.
- Grundzüge des Datenschutzrechts und aktuelle Datenschutzprobleme in der Markt- und Sozialforschung; 2017; Schweizer, A.
- The Failure of the Polls: Lessons Learned from the 2015 UK Polling Disaster; 2017; Sturgis, P.
- Overview: Online Surveys; 2017; Vehovar, V.; Lozar Manfreda, K.
- Three Methods for Occupation Coding Based on Statistical Learning; 2017; Geweon, H.; Schonlau, L.; Blohum, M.; Steiner, St.
- Standard Definitions: Final Dispositions of Case Codes and Outcome Rates for Surveys 2016; 2016
- Using Visual Analogue Scales in eHealth: Non-Response Effects in a Lifestyle Intervention; 2016; Kuhlmann, T.; Reips, U.-D.; Wienert, J.; Lippke, S.
- Standard Definitions Final Dispositions of Case Codes and Outcome Rates for Surveys; 2016
- FocusVision 2015 Annual MR Technology Report; 2016; Macer, T., Wilson, S.
- Last Year Your Answer Was … The Impact of Dependent Interviewing Wording and Survey Factors on...; 2016; Al Baghal, T.
- The Effects of a Delayed Incentive on Response Rates, Response Mode, Data Quality, and Sample Bias in...; 2016; McGonagle, K., Freedman, V. A.
- Can Student Populations in Developing Countries Be Reached by Online Surveys? The Case of the National...; 2016; Langer, A., Meuleman, B., Oshodi, A.-G. T., Schroyens, M.
- The Effects of Vignette Placement on Attitudes Toward Supporting Family Members; 2016; Lau, C. Q., Seltzer, J. A., Bianchi, S. M.
- Comparisons of Online Recruitment Strategies for Convenience Samples: Craigslist, Google AdWords, Facebook...; 2016; Antoun, C., Zhang, C., Conrad, F. G., Schober, M. F.
- Comparing Cognitive Interviewing and Online Probing: Do They Find Similar Results?; 2016; Meitinger, K., Behr, D.
- Device Effects - How different screen sizes affect answers in online surveys; 2016; Fisher, B.; Bernet, F.
- A look into the challenges of mixed-mode surveys; 2016; Klausch, L. T.
- The use of online social networks as a promotional tool for self-administered internet surveys; 2016; de Rada, V. D.; Arino, L. V. C; Blasco, M. G
- Investigating Cognitive Effort of Response Formats in Web Surveys using Paradata ; 2016; Hoehne, J. K.; Schlosser, S.; Krebs, D.
- Conducting Survey Experiments Using an Online Labor Market ; 2016; Fowler, S.; Willis, G. B.; Moser, R. P.; Townsend, R. L. M.; Maitland, A.; Sun, H.; Ferrer, R.; Berrigan...
- Mode Effects on Subjective Well-being Research: Do they Affect Regression Coefficients? ; 2016; Sanchez Tome, R.; Roberts, C.; Staehli, M. E.; Joye, D.
- Examining Trends in the Presence of Survey Mode Effects ; 2016; Hisako Kitada, H.; Lesser, V. M.
- Using a Response Propensity Model to Allocate Non-c ontingent Incentives in a Web Panel ; 2016; Masterton, M.
- Retrospective Measurement of Students’ Extracurricular Activities with a Self-administered Calendar...; 2016; Furthmueller, P.
- Privacy Concerns in Responses to Sensitive Questions. A Survey Experiment on the Influence of Numeric...; 2016; Bader, F., Bauer, J., Kroher, M., Riordan, P.
- Ballpoint Pens as Incentives with Mail Questionnaires – Results of a Survey Experiment; 2016; Heise, M.
- Non-Observation Bias in an Address-Register-Based CATI/CAPI Mixed Mode Survey; 2016; Lipps, O.
- Bees to Honey or Flies to Manure? How the Usual Subject Recruitment Exacerbates the Shortcomings of...; 2016; Snell, S. A., Hillygus, D. S.
- Thinking Inside the Box Visual Design of the Response Box Affects Creative Divergent Thinking in an...; 2016; Mohr, A. H.; Sell, A.; Lindsay, T.
- Detecting Insufficient Effort Responding with an Infrequency Scale: Evaluating Validity and Participant...; 2016; Huang, J. L.; Bowling, N. A.; Liu, Me.; Li, Yu.
- Detecting careless respondents in web-based questionnaires: Which method to use?; 2016; Niesen, A. S. M.; Meijer, R. R.; Tendeiro, J. N.
- Web surveys for offline rural communities ; 2016; Gichohi, B. W.
- On-line life history calendar and sensitive topics: A pilot study; 2016; Morselli, D.; Berchtold, A.; Granell, J.-C. S.; Berchtold, And.
- Does survey mode matter for studying electoral behaviour? Evidence from the 2009 German Longitudinal...; 2016; Bytzek, E.; Bieber, I. E.
- The impact of visual design and response formats on data quality in a web survey of MOOC students; 2016; Maloshonok, N.; Terentev, E.
- An experiment comparing grids and item-by-item formats in web surveys completed through PCs and smartphones...; 2016; Revilla, M.; Toninelli, D.; Ochoa, C.
- Establishing the accuracy of online panels for survey research; 2016; Bruggen, E.; van den Brakel, J.; Krosnick, J. A.
- Eye-tracking Social Desirability Bias; 2016; Kaminska, O.; Foulsham, T.
- Evaluating Three Approaches to Statistically Adjust for Mode Effects; 2016; Kolenikov, S.; Kennedy, C.
- Distractions: The Incidence and Consequences of Interruptions for Survey Respondents ; 2016; Ansolabehere, S.; Schaffner, B. F.