The Researcher, the Incentive, the Panelists and Their Response: The Role of Strong Reciprocity for the Panelists’ Survey Participation

In this contribution, the hypothesis of reciprocity is tested directly in order to contribute to an evidence-based explanation why an unconditionally prepaid monetary incentive is the most effective and efficient strategy for boosting response rates in surveys. In the context of a multiple-wave pan...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Author: Rolf Becker
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: European Survey Research Association 2023-10-01
Series:Survey Research Methods
Subjects:
Online Access:https://ojs.ub.uni-konstanz.de/srm/article/view/7975
_version_ 1797660622521892864
author Rolf Becker
author_facet Rolf Becker
author_sort Rolf Becker
collection DOAJ
description In this contribution, the hypothesis of reciprocity is tested directly in order to contribute to an evidence-based explanation why an unconditionally prepaid monetary incentive is the most effective and efficient strategy for boosting response rates in surveys. In the context of a multiple-wave panel, Swiss juveniles who received cash are interviewed in an online survey on their preference for reciprocity. This information is used in the next panel wave a year later to reveal the effect of the panelists’ reciprocal preferences on their propensity to start completing an online questionnaire. Applying longitudinal paradata of the fieldwork period and the statistical procedures of event history analysis, it is found that panelists who provide preferences for strong reciprocity are more likely to take part at the survey immediately after the invitation. It is also found that the likelihood to reciprocate declines the greater the time since the gratuities are given and the invitation to participate in the survey is delivered. Numerous reminders do not help to refresh the invitees’ reciprocal preferences. In sum, prepaid monetary incentives are necessary but not sufficient for enhancing response rates: they are one of several strategies for inducing target persons’ participation in surveys.
first_indexed 2024-03-11T18:33:30Z
format Article
id doaj.art-0a1a23eb6bd14ae982d4b9e18c44e13a
institution Directory Open Access Journal
issn 1864-3361
language English
last_indexed 2024-03-11T18:33:30Z
publishDate 2023-10-01
publisher European Survey Research Association
record_format Article
series Survey Research Methods
spelling doaj.art-0a1a23eb6bd14ae982d4b9e18c44e13a2023-10-13T07:33:49ZengEuropean Survey Research AssociationSurvey Research Methods1864-33612023-10-0117310.18148/srm/2023.v17i3.7975The Researcher, the Incentive, the Panelists and Their Response: The Role of Strong Reciprocity for the Panelists’ Survey ParticipationRolf Becker0University of Bern In this contribution, the hypothesis of reciprocity is tested directly in order to contribute to an evidence-based explanation why an unconditionally prepaid monetary incentive is the most effective and efficient strategy for boosting response rates in surveys. In the context of a multiple-wave panel, Swiss juveniles who received cash are interviewed in an online survey on their preference for reciprocity. This information is used in the next panel wave a year later to reveal the effect of the panelists’ reciprocal preferences on their propensity to start completing an online questionnaire. Applying longitudinal paradata of the fieldwork period and the statistical procedures of event history analysis, it is found that panelists who provide preferences for strong reciprocity are more likely to take part at the survey immediately after the invitation. It is also found that the likelihood to reciprocate declines the greater the time since the gratuities are given and the invitation to participate in the survey is delivered. Numerous reminders do not help to refresh the invitees’ reciprocal preferences. In sum, prepaid monetary incentives are necessary but not sufficient for enhancing response rates: they are one of several strategies for inducing target persons’ participation in surveys. https://ojs.ub.uni-konstanz.de/srm/article/view/7975Event history analysis; norm of reciprocity; online survey; prepaid monetary incentive; response rate; panel
spellingShingle Rolf Becker
The Researcher, the Incentive, the Panelists and Their Response: The Role of Strong Reciprocity for the Panelists’ Survey Participation
Survey Research Methods
Event history analysis; norm of reciprocity; online survey; prepaid monetary incentive; response rate; panel
title The Researcher, the Incentive, the Panelists and Their Response: The Role of Strong Reciprocity for the Panelists’ Survey Participation
title_full The Researcher, the Incentive, the Panelists and Their Response: The Role of Strong Reciprocity for the Panelists’ Survey Participation
title_fullStr The Researcher, the Incentive, the Panelists and Their Response: The Role of Strong Reciprocity for the Panelists’ Survey Participation
title_full_unstemmed The Researcher, the Incentive, the Panelists and Their Response: The Role of Strong Reciprocity for the Panelists’ Survey Participation
title_short The Researcher, the Incentive, the Panelists and Their Response: The Role of Strong Reciprocity for the Panelists’ Survey Participation
title_sort researcher the incentive the panelists and their response the role of strong reciprocity for the panelists survey participation
topic Event history analysis; norm of reciprocity; online survey; prepaid monetary incentive; response rate; panel
url https://ojs.ub.uni-konstanz.de/srm/article/view/7975
work_keys_str_mv AT rolfbecker theresearchertheincentivethepanelistsandtheirresponsetheroleofstrongreciprocityforthepanelistssurveyparticipation
AT rolfbecker researchertheincentivethepanelistsandtheirresponsetheroleofstrongreciprocityforthepanelistssurveyparticipation