Scratch the Scratch-off: Testing Prepaid and Conditional Incentives with Postcard and Letter Invitations in a Web-push Design with an Address-based Sample

IF 1.1 3区 社会学 Q2 ANTHROPOLOGY Field Methods Pub Date : 2022-01-03 DOI:10.1177/1525822X211069640
P. Brenner, T. Buskirk
{"title":"Scratch the Scratch-off: Testing Prepaid and Conditional Incentives with Postcard and Letter Invitations in a Web-push Design with an Address-based Sample","authors":"P. Brenner, T. Buskirk","doi":"10.1177/1525822X211069640","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"We tested a novel extension to mailed invitations to a web-push survey, using a postcard invitation to deliver a scratch-off giftcode incentive similar to an instant-win lottery ticket. Scratch-off postcards were included as one of five conditions in randomized survey experiment varying two mailing types (letter and postcard) and three incentive types (prepaid cash, prepaid giftcodes, and conditional giftcodes). Invitations were sent to a sample of 17,808 addresses in Boston, Massachusetts, recruiting for a new online panel study of city residents. We report response rates and costs for each condition. Findings suggest that letters achieve higher response rates than postcards and are more cost effective overall. We also find that conditional incentives achieve higher response rates and are more cost effective, although conflating factors do not permit clear inferences. Notably, the novel scratch-off postcard condition achieved the lowest response rate and the highest costs per completed survey.","PeriodicalId":48060,"journal":{"name":"Field Methods","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.1000,"publicationDate":"2022-01-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Field Methods","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/1525822X211069640","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ANTHROPOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

Abstract

We tested a novel extension to mailed invitations to a web-push survey, using a postcard invitation to deliver a scratch-off giftcode incentive similar to an instant-win lottery ticket. Scratch-off postcards were included as one of five conditions in randomized survey experiment varying two mailing types (letter and postcard) and three incentive types (prepaid cash, prepaid giftcodes, and conditional giftcodes). Invitations were sent to a sample of 17,808 addresses in Boston, Massachusetts, recruiting for a new online panel study of city residents. We report response rates and costs for each condition. Findings suggest that letters achieve higher response rates than postcards and are more cost effective overall. We also find that conditional incentives achieve higher response rates and are more cost effective, although conflating factors do not permit clear inferences. Notably, the novel scratch-off postcard condition achieved the lowest response rate and the highest costs per completed survey.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
刮刮刮刮:在基于地址的网页推送设计中测试明信片和信件邀请的预付和条件激励
我们测试了一种新的网络推送调查的邮寄邀请扩展,使用明信片邀请来提供类似于即时中奖彩票的刮刮礼品代码激励。随机调查实验将刮刮明信片作为五种条件之一,包括两种邮寄类型(信件和明信片)和三种激励类型(预付现金、预付礼品代码和有条件礼品代码)。邀请函被发送到马萨诸塞州波士顿的17808个地址样本,为一项新的城市居民在线小组研究招募人员。我们报告每种情况的响应率和成本。调查结果表明,信件的回复率高于明信片,总体上更具成本效益。我们还发现,条件激励可以获得更高的响应率,并且更具成本效益,尽管将因素混为一谈不允许做出明确的推断。值得注意的是,这种新颖的刮刮明信片条件的回复率最低,每次完成调查的成本最高。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Field Methods
Field Methods Multiple-
CiteScore
2.70
自引率
5.90%
发文量
41
期刊介绍: Field Methods (formerly Cultural Anthropology Methods) is devoted to articles about the methods used by field wzorkers in the social and behavioral sciences and humanities for the collection, management, and analysis data about human thought and/or human behavior in the natural world. Articles should focus on innovations and issues in the methods used, rather than on the reporting of research or theoretical/epistemological questions about research. High-quality articles using qualitative and quantitative methods-- from scientific or interpretative traditions-- dealing with data collection and analysis in applied and scholarly research from writers in the social sciences, humanities, and related professions are all welcome in the pages of the journal.
期刊最新文献
ChatGPTest: Opportunities and Cautionary Tales of Utilizing AI for Questionnaire Pretesting What predicts willingness to participate in a follow-up panel study among respondents to a national web/mail survey? Invited Review: Collecting Data through Dyadic Interviews: A Systematic Review Offering Web Response as a Refusal Conversion Technique in a Mixed-mode Survey Network of Categories: A Method to Aggregate Egocentric Network Survey Data into a Whole Network Structure
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1