| Title |
The cost-effectiveness of cash versus lottery incentives for a web-based, stated-preference community survey
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
HEPAC Health Economics in Prevention and Care, June 2011
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s10198-011-0332-0 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Aleksandra Gajic, David Cameron, Jeremiah Hurley |
| Abstract |
We present the results of a randomized experiment to test the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of response incentives for a stated-preference survey of a general community population. The survey was administered using a mixed-mode approach, in which community members were invited to participate using a traditional mailed letter using contact information for a representative sample of the community; but individuals completed the survey via the web, which exploited the advantages of electronic capture. Individuals were randomized to four incentive groups: (a) no incentive, (b) prepaid cash incentive ($2), (c) a low lottery (10 prizes of $25) and (d) a high lottery (2 prizes of $250). Letters of invitation were mailed to 3,000 individuals. In total, 405 individuals (14.4%) contacted the website and 277 (9.8%) provided complete responses. The prepaid cash incentive generated the highest contact and response rates (23.3 and 17.3%, respectively), and no incentive generated the lowest (9.1 and 5.7%, respectively). The high lottery, however, was the most cost-effective incentive for obtaining completed surveys: compared with no incentive, the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) per completed survey for high lottery was $13.89; for prepaid cash, the ICER was $18.29. This finding suggests that the preferred response incentive for community-based, stated-preference surveys is a lottery with a small number of large prizes. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 3 | 75% |
| Netherlands | 1 | 25% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 4 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 95 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 5 | 5% |
| United Kingdom | 2 | 2% |
| Colombia | 1 | 1% |
| Brazil | 1 | 1% |
| Spain | 1 | 1% |
| Canada | 1 | 1% |
| Unknown | 84 | 88% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 19 | 20% |
| Researcher | 17 | 18% |
| Student > Master | 17 | 18% |
| Student > Bachelor | 10 | 11% |
| Professor | 4 | 4% |
| Other | 9 | 9% |
| Unknown | 19 | 20% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Social Sciences | 21 | 22% |
| Economics, Econometrics and Finance | 13 | 14% |
| Psychology | 10 | 11% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 6 | 6% |
| Computer Science | 5 | 5% |
| Other | 16 | 17% |
| Unknown | 24 | 25% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 17 January 2013.
All research outputs
#14,600,874
of 25,374,917 outputs
Outputs from HEPAC Health Economics in Prevention and Care
#772
of 1,303 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#85,090
of 126,822 outputs
Outputs of similar age from HEPAC Health Economics in Prevention and Care
#12
of 14 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,917 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,303 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.7. This one is in the 39th percentile – i.e., 39% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 126,822 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 14 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 14th percentile – i.e., 14% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.