保证激励和抽奖:对大学生敏感话题网络调查中参与度、数据质量和成本的影响

IF 3 2区 社会学 Q2 COMPUTER SCIENCE, INTERDISCIPLINARY APPLICATIONS Social Science Computer Review Pub Date : 2023-07-21 DOI:10.1177/08944393231189853
Jennifer Dykema, John Stevenson, Cameron P. Jones, Brendan F Day
{"title":"保证激励和抽奖:对大学生敏感话题网络调查中参与度、数据质量和成本的影响","authors":"Jennifer Dykema, John Stevenson, Cameron P. Jones, Brendan F Day","doi":"10.1177/08944393231189853","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Many studies rely on traditional web survey methods in which all contacts with sample members are through email and the questionnaire is administered exclusively online. Because it is difficult to effectively administer prepaid incentives via email, researchers frequently employ lotteries or prize draws as incentives even though their influence on survey participation is small. The current study examines whether a prize draw is more effective if it is divided into a few larger amounts versus several smaller amounts and compares prize draws to a small but guaranteed postpaid incentive. Data are from the 2019 Campus Climate Survey on Sexual Assault and Sexual Misconduct. Sample members include 38,434 undergraduate and graduate students at a large Midwestern university who were randomly assigned to receive: a guaranteed $5 Amazon gift card; entry into a high-payout drawing for one of four $500 prizes; or entry into a low-payout drawing for one of twenty $100 prizes. Results indicate the guaranteed incentive increased response rates, with no difference between the prize draws. While results from various data quality outcomes show the guaranteed incentive reduced break-off rates and the high-payout drawing increased item nonresponse, there were no differences across incentive conditions in rates of speeding, reporting of sensitive data, straightlining, or sample representativeness. As expected, the prize draws had much lower overall and per complete costs.","PeriodicalId":49509,"journal":{"name":"Social Science Computer Review","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-07-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Guaranteed Incentives and Prize Drawings: Effects on Participation, Data Quality, and Costs in a Web Survey of College Students on Sensitive Topics\",\"authors\":\"Jennifer Dykema, John Stevenson, Cameron P. Jones, Brendan F Day\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/08944393231189853\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Many studies rely on traditional web survey methods in which all contacts with sample members are through email and the questionnaire is administered exclusively online. Because it is difficult to effectively administer prepaid incentives via email, researchers frequently employ lotteries or prize draws as incentives even though their influence on survey participation is small. The current study examines whether a prize draw is more effective if it is divided into a few larger amounts versus several smaller amounts and compares prize draws to a small but guaranteed postpaid incentive. Data are from the 2019 Campus Climate Survey on Sexual Assault and Sexual Misconduct. Sample members include 38,434 undergraduate and graduate students at a large Midwestern university who were randomly assigned to receive: a guaranteed $5 Amazon gift card; entry into a high-payout drawing for one of four $500 prizes; or entry into a low-payout drawing for one of twenty $100 prizes. Results indicate the guaranteed incentive increased response rates, with no difference between the prize draws. While results from various data quality outcomes show the guaranteed incentive reduced break-off rates and the high-payout drawing increased item nonresponse, there were no differences across incentive conditions in rates of speeding, reporting of sensitive data, straightlining, or sample representativeness. As expected, the prize draws had much lower overall and per complete costs.\",\"PeriodicalId\":49509,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Social Science Computer Review\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-07-21\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Social Science Computer Review\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/08944393231189853\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"COMPUTER SCIENCE, INTERDISCIPLINARY APPLICATIONS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Social Science Computer Review","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/08944393231189853","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"COMPUTER SCIENCE, INTERDISCIPLINARY APPLICATIONS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

许多研究依靠传统的网络调查方法,所有与样本成员的联系都是通过电子邮件进行的,调查问卷完全在网上进行。由于很难通过电子邮件有效地管理预付奖励,研究人员经常使用彩票或抽奖作为奖励,尽管它们对调查参与的影响很小。目前的研究考察了将抽奖分成几个较大的金额和几个较小的金额是否更有效,并将抽奖与小额但保证支付的奖励进行了比较。数据来自2019年关于性侵犯和性行为不端的校园气候调查。样本成员包括中西部一所大型大学的38434名本科生和研究生,他们被随机分配收到:一张保证价值5美元的亚马逊礼品卡;进入高奖金抽奖,从四个500美元的奖金中获得一个;或者参加一个低奖金抽奖,从20个100美元的奖品中选择一个。结果表明,保证激励增加了回复率,抽奖之间没有区别。虽然来自各种数据质量结果的结果表明,有保证的激励减少了中断率,高支付的抽奖增加了项目不反应,但在加速率、敏感数据报告率、直线性或样本代表性方面,激励条件没有差异。正如预期的那样,抽奖的总成本和单位成本要低得多。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Guaranteed Incentives and Prize Drawings: Effects on Participation, Data Quality, and Costs in a Web Survey of College Students on Sensitive Topics
Many studies rely on traditional web survey methods in which all contacts with sample members are through email and the questionnaire is administered exclusively online. Because it is difficult to effectively administer prepaid incentives via email, researchers frequently employ lotteries or prize draws as incentives even though their influence on survey participation is small. The current study examines whether a prize draw is more effective if it is divided into a few larger amounts versus several smaller amounts and compares prize draws to a small but guaranteed postpaid incentive. Data are from the 2019 Campus Climate Survey on Sexual Assault and Sexual Misconduct. Sample members include 38,434 undergraduate and graduate students at a large Midwestern university who were randomly assigned to receive: a guaranteed $5 Amazon gift card; entry into a high-payout drawing for one of four $500 prizes; or entry into a low-payout drawing for one of twenty $100 prizes. Results indicate the guaranteed incentive increased response rates, with no difference between the prize draws. While results from various data quality outcomes show the guaranteed incentive reduced break-off rates and the high-payout drawing increased item nonresponse, there were no differences across incentive conditions in rates of speeding, reporting of sensitive data, straightlining, or sample representativeness. As expected, the prize draws had much lower overall and per complete costs.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Social Science Computer Review
Social Science Computer Review 社会科学-计算机:跨学科应用
CiteScore
9.00
自引率
4.90%
发文量
95
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: Unique Scope Social Science Computer Review is an interdisciplinary journal covering social science instructional and research applications of computing, as well as societal impacts of informational technology. Topics included: artificial intelligence, business, computational social science theory, computer-assisted survey research, computer-based qualitative analysis, computer simulation, economic modeling, electronic modeling, electronic publishing, geographic information systems, instrumentation and research tools, public administration, social impacts of computing and telecommunications, software evaluation, world-wide web resources for social scientists. Interdisciplinary Nature Because the Uses and impacts of computing are interdisciplinary, so is Social Science Computer Review. The journal is of direct relevance to scholars and scientists in a wide variety of disciplines. In its pages you''ll find work in the following areas: sociology, anthropology, political science, economics, psychology, computer literacy, computer applications, and methodology.
期刊最新文献
The Moderating Role of Self-Esteem in the Relationship Between Social Media Use and Life Satisfaction Among Older Adults Feminist Identity and Online Activism in Four Countries From 2019 to 2023 Can AI Lie? Chabot Technologies, the Subject, and the Importance of Lying Improving the Quality of Individual-Level Web Tracking: Challenges of Existing Approaches and Introduction of a New Content and Long-Tail Sensitive Academic Solution Using Google Trends Data to Study High-Frequency Search Terms: Evidence for a Reliability-Frequency Continuum
×
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