Improving response rate and quality of survey data with a scratch lottery ticket incentive

BMC Medical Research Methodology

Jan Abel. Olsen³  Birgit Abelsen¹  Frank Olsen² 

[1] Northern Research Institute Alta, PB 1463, N-9506, Alta, Norway;Center of Clinical Documentation and Evaluation, Regional Health Authority of Northern Norway, PB 6, N-9038, Tromsø, Norway;Institute of Community Medicine, Faculty of Health Sciences, University of Tromsø, N-9037, Tromsø, Norway

关键词: Item nonresponse;    Nonresponse error;    Survey;    Response rate;    Incentive;   

Others  :  1136703
DOI  :  10.1186/1471-2288-12-52

 received in 2011-05-13, accepted in 2012-04-19,  发布年份 2012

【 摘 要 】

Background

The quality of data collected in survey research is usually indicated by the response rate; the representativeness of the sample, and; the rate of completed questions (item-response). In attempting to improve a generally declining response rate in surveys considerable efforts are being made through follow-up mailings and various types of incentives. This study examines effects of including a scratch lottery ticket in the invitation letter to a survey.

Method

Questionnaires concerning oral health were mailed to a random sample of 2,400 adults. A systematically selected half of the sample (1,200 adults) received a questionnaire including a scratch lottery ticket. One reminder without the incentive was sent.

Results

The incentive increased the response rate and improved representativeness by reaching more respondents with lower education. Furthermore, it reduced item nonresponse. The initial incentive had no effect on the propensity to respond after the reminder.

Conclusion

When attempting to improve survey data, three issues become important: response rate, representativeness, and item-response. This study shows that including a scratch lottery ticket in the invitation letter performs well on all the three.

【 授权许可】

   
2012 Olsen et al; licensee BioMed Central Ltd.

【 参考文献 】

• [1]Groves M: Nonresponse rates and nonresponse bias in household surveys. Int J of Public Opin R 2006, 70:646-675.
• [2]Arzheimer K, Klein M: The effect of material incentives on the return rate, the panel attrition and the sample composition of a mail panel survey – results of an empirical experiment. Int J of Public Opin R 1999, 11:366-375.
• [3]Larson P, Chow G: Total cost/response rate trade-offs in mail survey research: impact of follow-up mailings and monetary incentives. Ind Market Manag 2001, 32:533-537.
• [4]Singer E: Nonresponse bias in houshold surveys. Public Opin Quart 2006, 70:637-654.
• [5]Curtin R, Presser S, Singer E: Changes in telephone survey nonresponse over the past quarter century. Public Opin Quart 2005, 69:87-98.
• [6]de Leeuw E, de Heer W: Trends in household survey nonresponse: A longitudinal and international comparition. In In Survey Nonresponse. Edited by Groves R, Dillman D, Eltinge J, Little R. Wiley, New York; 2002.
• [7]Ryu E, Couper M, Marans R: Survey incentives: Cash vs in-kind; face-to-face vs mail; response rate vs nonresponse error. Int J of Public Opin R 2005, 18:89-106.
• [8]Shettle C, Mooney G: Monetary incentives in U.S. government surveys. J Off Stat 1999, 15:231-250.
• [9]Singer E, van Hoewyk J, Gebler N, Raughunathan T, McGonagle K: The effect of incentives on response rates in interviewer-mediated surveys. J Off Stat 1999, 15:217-230.
• [10]Teisl M, Roe B, Vayda M: Incentive effects on response rates, data quality, and survey administration costs. Int J of Public Opin R 2005, 18:364-373.
• [11]Edwards P, Roberts I, Clarke M, DiGuiseppi C, Wentz R, Kwan I, Cooper R, Felix L, Pratap M: Methods to increase response to postal and electronic questionnaires (Review). Cohrane Database of systematic Reviews, ; 2009.
• [12]Singer E, van Hoewyk J, Maher M: Experiments with incentives in telephone survey. Public Opin Quart 2000, 64:171-188.
• [13]Singer E: In Survey Nonresponse. Edited by Groves R, Dillman D, Eltinge J, Little R. John Wiley & Sons, New York; 2002. The use of incentives to reduce nonresponse in household surveys
• [14]Church A: Estimating the Effect of Incentives on Mail Survey Response Rates: A Meta-Analysis. Public Opin Quart 1993, 57:62-79.
• [15]Jobber D, Saunders J, Mitchell V: Prepaid monetary incentive effects on mail survey response. J B Res 2004, 57:21-25.
• [16]James J, Bolstein R: The effect of monetary incentives and follow-up mailings on the response rate and response quality in mail surveys. Public Opin Quart 1990, 56:346-361.
• [17]Harris I, Khoo O, Young J, Solomon M, Rae H: Lottery incentives did not improve response rate to a mailed survey: a randomized controlled trial. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology 2008, 61:609-610.
• [18]Finsen V, Storeheier A: Scratch lottery tickets are a poor incentive to respond to mail questionnaires. BMC Med Res Methodol 2006, 6:1-5. BioMed Central Full Text
• [19]Kalantar J, Talley N: The effects of lottery incentive and length of questionnaire on health survey response rates: a randomized study. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology 1999, 52:1117-1122.
• [20]Robertson J, Walkom E, McGettigan P: Response rates and representativeness: a lottery incentive improves physician survey return rates. Pharmacoepidemiology and Drug Safety 2005, 14:571-577.
• [21]Leung G, Ho L, Chan M, Johnston J, Wong F: The effects of cash and lottery incentives on mailed surveys to physicians A randomized trial. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology 2002, 55:801-807.
• [22]Roberts L, Wilson S, Roalfe A, Bridge P: A randomised controlled trial to determine the effect on response of including a lottery incentive in health surveys. BMC Health Services Research 2004, 4:30. BioMed Central Full Text
• [23]Halpern S, Kohn R, Dornbrand-Lo A, Asch D, Volpp K: Lottery-Based versus Fixed Incentives to Increase Clinicians' Response to Surveys. Health Services Research 2011.
• [24]Moses S, Clark T: Effect of prize draw incentive on the response rate to a postal survey of obstetricians and gynaecologists: a randomised controlled trial. BMC Health Services Research 2004, 4:14. BioMed Central Full Text
• [25]Aadahl M, Jørgensen T: The effect on conducting a lottery on questionnaire response rates: a randomised controlled trial. European Journal of epidemiology 2003, 18:941-944.
• [26]Deutskens E, de Ruyters K, Wetzels M, Oosterveld P: Response rate and response quality of internet-based surveys: An experimental study . Marketing Letters 2004, 15:21-36.
• [27]Göritz A: The impact of material incentives on response quantity, response quality, sample composition, survey outcome, and cost in online access panels. International Journal of Market Research 2004, 46:327-345.
• [28]Bonke J, Fallesen P: The impact of incentives and interview methods on response quantity and quality in diary- and booklet-based surveys. Survey Research Methods 2010, 4:91-101.
• [29]Johansson L, Solvoll K, Opdahl S, Bjorneboe G-E, Drevon C: Response rates with different distribution methods and reward, and reproducibility of a quantitative food frequency questionnaire. European. European Journal of Clinical Nutrition 1997, 51:346-353.
• [30]Martinson B, Lazovich D, Lando H, Perry C, McGovern P, Boyle R: Effectiveness of monetary incentives for recruiting adolescents to an intervention trial to reduce smoking. Preventive Medicine 2000, 31:706-713.
• [31]McLaren B, Shelley J: Response rates of Victorian general practitioners to a mailed survey on miscarriage: randomised trial of a prize and two forms of introduction to the research. Australian and New Zealand Journal of Public Health 2000, 24:360-364.
• [32]Blythe B: Increasing mailed survey responses with a lottery. Social Work Research Abstracts 1986, 22:18-19.
• [33]Tjerbo T, Kværner K, Botten G, Aasland O: Use of incentives to enhance response rates in questionnaire surveys. Tidsskr Norske Laege 2005, 125:2496-2497.
• [34]Whiteman M, Langenberg P, Kjerulff K, McCarter R, Flaws J: A randomized trial of incentives to improve response rates to a mailed women's health questionnaire. Journal of Women's Health 2003, 12:821-828.
• [35]Øren A, Bakken I: Gambling and gambling problems i Norway. SINTEF, Trondheim; 2007.
• [36]Martin E, Abreu D, Winters F: Money and motive: effects of incentives on panel attrition in the survey of income and program participation. J Off Stat 2001, 17:276-284.
• [37]Willimack D, Schuman H, Pennel B, Lepkowski J: Effects of a Prepaid Non-Monetary Incentive on Response Rates and Response Quality in a Face-to-Face Survey. Public Opin Quart 1995, 96:1541-1545.
• [38]Gouldner A: The norm of reciprocity: a preliminary statement. Am Soc Rev 1960, 25:161-178.