Material Incentives and Other Potential Factors Associated With Response Rates to Internet Surveys of American Evaluation Association Members: Findings From a Randomized Experiment

被引:12
作者
Coryn, Chris L. S. [1 ]
Becho, Lyssa W. [1 ]
Westine, Carl D. [2 ]
Mateu, Pedro F. [3 ]
Abu-Obaid, Ruqayyah N. [1 ]
Hobson, Kristin A. [4 ]
Schroter, Daniela C. [1 ]
Dodds, Erica L. [1 ]
Vo, Anne T. [5 ]
Ramlow, Mary [1 ]
机构
[1] Western Michigan Univ, 1903 West Michigan Ave, Kalamazoo, MI 49008 USA
[2] Univ North Carolina Charlotte, Charlotte, NC USA
[3] Univ Pacifico, Lima, Peru
[4] Indiana Univ, Bloomington, IN USA
[5] Univ Southern Calif, Los Angeles, CA 90007 USA
关键词
research on evaluation; survey response rates; survey incentives; American Evaluation Association; MAIL; WEB; NEEDS; MODE;
D O I
10.1177/1098214018818371
中图分类号
C [社会科学总论];
学科分类号
03 ; 0303 ;
摘要
Internet surveys of American Evaluation Association (AEA) members are a common method for studying evaluation practice. Response rates obtained from Internet surveys of AEA members are, however, frequently very small. To investigate whether or not material incentives increase response rates to Internet surveys of AEA members, a between-subjects three-treatment and one control randomized experiment in which a randomly selected sample of AEA members were randomly assigned to a no-incentive control condition, lottery condition, token incentive condition, or philanthropic donation incentive condition was utilized. The overall response rate to the survey was 39.66% and the response rates for each of the four conditions were control = 36.24%, lottery = 44.39%, token incentive = 43.28%, and philanthropic donation = 34.67%, respectively. The cost-effectiveness of each of the four conditions also was examined, demonstrating that the lottery was the most cost-effective. Other factors potentially influencing response or nonresponse decisions also are discussed.
引用
收藏
页码:277 / 296
页数:20
相关论文
共 33 条
[1]  
[Anonymous], 2013, SAMPLING POPULATIONS
[2]   MONETARY INCENTIVES IN MAIL SURVEYS [J].
ARMSTRONG, JS .
PUBLIC OPINION QUARTERLY, 1975, 39 (01) :111-116
[3]  
Azzam T., 2011, Studies in Educational Evaluation, V37, P134, DOI [DOI 10.1016/J.STUEDUC.2011.04.006, 10.1016/j.stueduc.2011.04.006]
[4]  
Bosnjak M, 2003, SOC SCI COMPUT REV, V21, P208, DOI [10.1177/0894439303021002006, 10.1177/0894439303251569]
[5]  
Boulianne S., 2008, ENCY SURVEY RES METH, V1, P326
[6]   ESTIMATING THE EFFECT OF INCENTIVES ON MAIL SURVEY RESPONSE RATES - A METAANALYSIS [J].
CHURCH, AH .
PUBLIC OPINION QUARTERLY, 1993, 57 (01) :62-79
[7]   Response rates for mixed-mode surveys using mail and e-mail/Web [J].
Converse, Patrick D. ;
Wolfe, Edward W. ;
Huang, Xiaoting ;
Oswald, Frederick L. .
AMERICAN JOURNAL OF EVALUATION, 2008, 29 (01) :99-107
[8]   A meta-analysis of response rates in Web- or internet-based surveys [J].
Cook, C ;
Heath, F ;
Thompson, RL .
EDUCATIONAL AND PSYCHOLOGICAL MEASUREMENT, 2000, 60 (06) :821-836
[9]   A Decade of Research on Evaluation: A Systematic Review of Research on Evaluation Published Between 2005 and 2014 [J].
Coryn, Chris L. S. ;
Wilson, Lyssa N. ;
Westine, Carl D. ;
Hobson, Kristin A. ;
Ozeki, Satoshi ;
Fiekowsky, Erica L. ;
Greenman, Gregory D., II ;
Schroter, Daniela C. .
AMERICAN JOURNAL OF EVALUATION, 2017, 38 (03) :329-347
[10]   Does Research on Evaluation Matter? Findings From a Survey of American Evaluation Association Members and Prominent Evaluation Theorists and Scholars [J].
Coryn, Chris L. S. ;
Ozeki, Satoshi ;
Wilson, Lyssa N. ;
Greenman, Gregory D., II ;
Schroter, Daniela C. ;
Hobson, Kristin A. ;
Azzam, Tarek ;
Vo, Anne T. .
AMERICAN JOURNAL OF EVALUATION, 2016, 37 (02) :159-173