Effects of a financial incentive on health researchers' response to an online survey: A randomized controlled trial

Journal of Medical Internet Research

Volumn 12, Issue 2, 2010, Pages

  Wilson, Paul M ^a   Petticrew, Mark ^b   Calnan, Mike ^c   Nazareth, Irwin ^d  

^a UNIVERSITY OF YORK   (United Kingdom)

^b LONDON SCHOOL OF HYGIENE AND TROPICAL MEDICINE   (United Kingdom)

^c UNIVERSITY OF KENT   (United Kingdom)

^d UNIVERSITY COLLEGE LONDON   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Electronic Mail; Questionnaires; Randomized Controlled Trial; Reminder Systems; Reward

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; ATTITUDE TO HEALTH; CLINICAL TRIAL; CONTROLLED CLINICAL TRIAL; CONTROLLED STUDY; E-MAIL; ECONOMICS; HEALTH SERVICES RESEARCH; HEALTH SURVEY; HUMAN; INTERNET; METHODOLOGY; MOTIVATION; ONLINE SYSTEM; ORGANIZATION AND MANAGEMENT; PATIENT SELECTION; QUESTIONNAIRE; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL;

ELECTRONIC MAIL; HEALTH KNOWLEDGE, ATTITUDES, PRACTICE; HEALTH SERVICES RESEARCH; HUMANS; INTERNET; MOTIVATION; ONLINE SYSTEMS; PATIENT SELECTION; POPULATION SURVEILLANCE; QUESTIONNAIRES;

EID: 77953868420     PISSN: None     EISSN: 14388871     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.2196/jmir.1251     Document Type: Article

References (21)

1. Edwards PJ, Roberts I, Clarke MJ, DiGuiseppi C, Wentz R, Kwan I, et al. Methods to increase response to postal and electronic questionnaires. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2009;3. [doi: 10.1002/14651858.MR000008.pub4.] [Medline: 19588449]
2. VanGeest JB, Johnson TP, Welch VL. Methodologies for improving response rates in surveys of physicians: a systematic review. Eval Health Prof 2007 Dec;30(4):303-321. [Medline: 17986667] [doi: 10.1177/0163278707307899]
3. Göritz AS. Incentives in Web studies: Methodological issues and a review. International Journal of Internet Science 2008;1:58-70.
4. Homans GC. Social Behavior as Exchange. Amer J Sociol 1958;63(6):597-606. [doi: 10.1086/222355]
5. Bagozzi RP. Marketing as exchange. J Mark 1975;39:32-39.
6. McColl E, Jacoby A, Thomas L, Soutter J, Bamford C, Steen N, et al. Design and use of questionnaires: a review of best practice applicable to surveys of health service staff and patients. Health Technol Assess 2001;5(31):1-256 [FREE Full text] [Medline: 11809125]
7. Groves RM, Singer E, Corning A. Leverage-saliency theory of survey participation: description and an illustration. Public Opin Q 2000;64(3):299-308. [Medline: 11114270] [doi: 10.1086/317990]
8. Groves RM, Presser S, Dipko S. The role of topic interest in survey participation decisions. Public Opin Q 2004;68(1):2-31. [doi: 10.1093/poq/nfh002]
9. Cooksey D. A Review of UK Health Research Funding. London, England: HM Treasury; 2006.
10. Department of Health. Best Research for Best Health: A new national health research strategy. London, England: Department of Health; 2006.
11. Tooke J. Report of the High Level Group on Clinical Effectiveness. A report to Sir Liam Donaldson Chief Medical Officer. London, England: Department of Health; 2007.
12. World Health Organization. World Report on Knowledge for Better Health: Strengthening Health Systems. Geneva, Switzerland: World Health Organization; 2004.
13. Department of Health, Research and Development Directorate. Delivering Health Research. National Institute for Health Research Progress Report 2008/09. London, England: Department of Health; 2009.
14. Manfreda KL, Bosnjak M, Berzelak J, Haas I, Vehovar V, Berzelak N. Web surveys versus other survey modes. A Meta-Analysis Comparing Response Rates. International Journal of Market Research 2008;50:79-104.
15. Shih TH, Fan X. Comparing response rates from web and mail surveys: A meta-analysis. Field methods 2008;20(3):249-271. [doi: 10.1177/1525822X08317085]
16. SurveyMonkey.com. URL: http://www.surveymonkey.com [WebCite Cache ID 5iPPdPhoD]
17. Eysenbach G. Improving the quality of Web surveys: the Checklist for Reporting Results of Internet E-Surveys (CHERRIES). J Med Internet Res 2004 Sep 29;6(3):e34 [FREE Full text] [Medline: 15471760] [doi: 10.2196/jmir.6.3.e34]
18. Michaelidou N, Dibb S. Using e-mail questionnaires for consumer research: best practice in tackling non-response. Journal of Targeting, Measurement and Analysis for Marketing 2006;14(4):289-296. [doi: 10.1057/palgrave.jt.5740189]
19. Birnholtz JP, Horn DB, Finholt TA, Bae SJ. The effect of cash, electronic,and paper gift certificates asrespondent incentives for a web based survey of technologically sophisticated respondents. Soc Sci Comput Rev 2004;22:355-362. [doi: 10.1177/0894439304263147]
20. Porter SR, Whitcomb ME. The impact of lottery incentives on student survey response rates. Research in Higher Education 2003;44:389-407.
21. Downes-Le Guin T, Janowitz P, Stone R, Khorram S. Use of pre-incentives in an Internet survey. Journal of Online Research 2002. [doi: 10.1023/A:1024263031800]