Skip to main content
Key Specialties
Cardiology Diabetology Endocrinology Gastroenterology Geriatrics and Gerontology Gynecology and Obstetrics Hematology Infectious Disease Internal Medicine Nephrology Neurology Oncology Pediatrics Respiratory Medicine Rheumatology Surgery
Congress Coverage
2024 ASCO Annual Meeting 2024 ACC Congress 2023 ESMO Congress 2023 EASD Congress 2023 ERS Congress 2023 ESC Congress
Clinical Collections
Advances in Alzheimer’s

2024 ASCO Annual Meeting

Keep up to date with all the top stories and latest evidence with our hub page, including official congress videos and expert takeaways.
ADVANCED SEARCH
Log in
Top
The European Journal of Health Economics
Published in: The European Journal of Health Economics 6/2012

01-12-2012 | Original Paper

The cost-effectiveness of cash versus lottery incentives for a web-based, stated-preference community survey

Authors: Aleksandra Gajic, David Cameron, Jeremiah Hurley

Published in: The European Journal of Health Economics | Issue 6/2012

Login to get access

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.
Footnotes
1
Response rates are less well documented for health economic surveys, but the experience of those who regularly conduct stated preference surveys indicates that response rates have been falling in recent years [10].
 
2
This includes individuals who may not have access to the Internet. Because we have no way of identifying these individuals, we must assume all those who received the letter were eligible to respond.
 
Literature
1.
Ryan, M., Gerard, K., Amaya–Amaya, M.: Using Discrete Choice Experiments to Value Health and Health Care. Springer, Dordrecht (2008)CrossRef
2.
Hurley, J., Buckley, N., Cuff, K., Giacomini, M., Cameron, D.: Judgments regarding the fair division of goods: the impact of verbal versus quantitative descriptions of alternative principles. Social Choice and Welfare Forthcoming (2010)
3.
Nord, E., Richardson, J., Street, A., Kuhse, H., Singer, P.: Maximizing health benefits vs. Egalitarianism: an Australian survey of health issues. Soc. Sci. Med. 41(10), 1429–1437 (1995)PubMedCrossRef
4.
Dolan, P., Tsuchiya, A.: Health priorities and public preferences: the relative importance of past health experience and future health prospects. J. Health Econ. 24, 703–714 (2005)PubMedCrossRef
5.
Sheehan, K.: E-mail survey response rates: A review. J. Comput. Mediat. Commun. 6(2). (2001)
6.
Warriner, K., Goyder, J., Gjersten, H., honhner, P., McSpurren, K.: Charities, no; lotteries, no; cash, yes. Main effects and interactions in a Canadian incentives experiment. Public Opin Q 60, 542–562 (1996)CrossRef
7.
Bickart, B., Schmittlein, D.: The distribution of survey contact and participation in the United States: constructing a survey-based estimate. J. Mark. Res. 36(2), 286–294 (1999)CrossRef
8.
Kulka, R., Eyerman, J., McNeeley, M.: The use of monetary incentives in federal surveys on substance use and abuse. J. Econ. Soc. Meas. 30(2–3), 233–249 (2005)
9.
Dixon, J., Tucker, C.: Survey nonresponse. In: Marsden, P., Wright, J. (eds.) Handbook of Survey Research. Emerald Publishing Group, Bingley, UK (2010)
10.
Ryan, M.: Personal E-mail Communication, August 17. (2010)
11.
Bosnjak, M., Tuten, T.: Prepaid and promised incentives in web surveys. Soc. Sci. Comp. Rev. 21(2), 208–217 (2003)CrossRef
12.
Umbach, P.D.: Web-based surveys: best practices. New Dir. Inst. Res. 121, 23–38 (2004)
13.
Heerwegh, D.: An investigation of the effect of lotteries on web survey response rates. Field Methods 18(2), 205–220 (2006)CrossRef
14.
Edwards, P., Roberts, I., Clarke, M., DiGuiseppi, C., Pratap, S., Wentz, R., Kwan, I.: Increasing response rates to postal questionnaires: a systematic review. BMJ 324, 1–9 (2002)
15.
Armstrong, J.S.: Monetary incentives in mailed surveys. Public Opin. Q. 39, 111–116 (1975)CrossRef
16.
Linsky, A.S.: Stimulating responses to mailed questionnaires: a review. Public Opin. Q. 39, 82–101 (1975)CrossRef
17.
Church, A.H.: Estimating the effect of incentives on mail survey response rates: a meta-analysis. Public Opin. Q. 57, 62–79 (1993)CrossRef
18.
Leung, G.M., Ho, L.M., Chan, M.F., Johnston, J.M., Wong, F.K.: The effects of cash and lottery incentives on mailed surveys to physicians. A randomized trial. J. Clin. Epidemiol. 55, 801–807 (2002)PubMedCrossRef
19.
Porter, S.R., Whitcomb, M.E.: The impact of lottery incentives on student survey response rates. Res. High. Educ. 44(4), 389–407 (2003)CrossRef
20.
Göritz, A.S.: Incentives in web-based studies: methodological issues and review. Int. J. Internet Sci. 1, 58–70 (2006)
21.
Frickl, A., Bachtiger, M.T., Reips, U.-D.: Financial incentives, personal information and drop-out rate in online studies. In: Reips, U.-D., Bosnjak, M. (eds.) Dimensions of Internet Science, pp. 209–219. Pabst Science Publishers, Berlin (2001)
22.
Duetskens, E., Ruyter, K.D., Wetzels, M., Oosterveld, P.: Response rate and response quality of internet-based surveys: an experimental study. Mark. Lett. 15(1), 21–36 (2004)CrossRef
23.
Göritz, A.S.: The impact of material incentives on response quality, sample composition, survey income, and cost in online access panels. Int. J. Mark. Res. 46, 327–345 (2004)
24.
Su, J., Shao, S., Fang, J.: Effects of incentives on web-based surveys. Tsinghua Sci. Technol. 13(3), 344–347 (2008)CrossRef
25.
Birnholtz, J.P., Horn, D.B., Finholt, T.A., Bae, S.J.: The effects of cash, electronic and paper gift certificates for a web-based survey of technologically sophisticated respondents. Soc. Sci. Comp. Rev. 22, 355–362 (2004)CrossRef
26.
Smith, R.: The discrete-choice willingness-to-pay question format in health economics: should we adopt environmental guidelines. Med. Decis. Mak. 20(2), 194–204 (2000)CrossRef
27.
Messick, D.M., McClintock, C.G.: Motivational bases of choice n experimental games. J. Exp. Soc. Psychol. 4, 1–25 (1968)CrossRef
28.
Hurley, J., Mentzakis, E.: The Existence and Magnitude of Health Care Externalities: Evidence from a Choice Experiment. Hamilton, ON: McMaster University Centre for Health Economics and Policy Analysis Working Paper 11–01. (2011)
29.
Dillman, D.A., Phelps, G., Tortora, R., Swift, K., Kohrell, J., Berck, J., Messer, B.: Mail and Internet Survey: The Tailored Design Method. Wiley, New York (2007)
30.
Offerman, T., Sonnemans, J., Schram, A.: Value orientations, expectations and voluntary contributions in public goods. Econ. J. 106(437), 817–845 (1996)CrossRef
31.
Buckley, N., Chan, K.S., Chowhan, J., Mestelman, S., Shehata, M.: Value orientations, income and displacement effects, and voluntary contributions. Exp. Econ. 4(2), 183–195 (2001)
32.
Dillman, D.A.: Response rate and measurement differences in mixed mode surveys using mail, telephone, interactive voice response and the internet. Soc. Sci. Res. 38(1), 1–18 (2009)CrossRef
33.
Manfreda, L., Bosnjak, M., Haas, J., Vehovar, V.: Web surveys versus other survey modes: a meta-analysis comparing response rates. Int. J. Mark. Res. 50, 79–104 (2008)
34.
Metadata
Title
The cost-effectiveness of cash versus lottery incentives for a web-based, stated-preference community survey
Authors
Aleksandra Gajic
David Cameron
Jeremiah Hurley
Publication date
01-12-2012
Publisher
Springer-Verlag
Published in
The European Journal of Health Economics / Issue 6/2012
Print ISSN: 1618-7598
Electronic ISSN: 1618-7601
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10198-011-0332-0

Other articles of this Issue 6/2012

The European Journal of Health Economics 6/2012 Go to the issue

Original Paper

Health care usage among immigrants and native-born elderly populations in eleven European countries: results from SHARE

Original Paper

Paying informally in the Albanian health care sector: a two-tiered stochastic frontier model

Original Paper

Favourable cost-benefit in an early defibrillation programme using dual dispatch of ambulance and fire services in out-of-hospital cardiac arrest

Original Paper

Measuring attitude toward social health insurance

Original Paper

The use of cost per life year gained as a measurement of cost-effectiveness in Spain: a systematic review of recent publications

Original Paper

Cost effectiveness of golimumab for the treatment of active psoriatic arthritis