The impact of monetary inducement on uninformed response error

  • I. Del Hawkins
  • Kenneth A. Coney
  • Donald W. Jackson
Article

Abstract

Response quality (accuracy) is replacing response quantity (response rate and nonresponse error) as the major issue in survey research methodology. Using a survey of 500 members of the general public from four cities, the authors examine an important aspect of response quality: uniformed response error. By asking respondents to evaluate the past performance of a fictitious public agency, the authors examine the effect that using a monetary inducement to increase the response rate to a mail survey has on uniformed response error. In addition, the ability of a “Don’t know” option to reduce uninformed response error is analyzed. The important impact that uniformed responses can have on response quality is documented.

Keywords

Market Research Neutral Position Monetary Incentive Past Performance Mail Survey 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Bishop, George F., et al. 1980. “Pseudo-opinions on Public Affairs.”Public Opinion Quarterly 44 (Summer): 198–209.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Bishop, George F., Robert W. Oldendick, Alfred J. Tuchfarber. 1983. “Effects of Filler Questions in Public Opinion Surveys.”Public Opinion Quarterly 47 (Winter): 528–546.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Converse, Philip E.. 1970. “Attitudes and Non-Attitudes: Continuation of a Dialogue,” inThe quantitative Analysis of Social Problems. Ed. E. R. Tufte. Reading Massachusetts: Addison-Wesley.Google Scholar
  4. Gill, S. N., 1947. “How Do You Stand on Sin?”Tide (March 14): 72.Google Scholar
  5. Godwin, R. Kenneth. 1979. “The Consequences of Large Monetary Incentives in Mail Surveys of Elites.”Public Opinion Quarterly 43 (Fall): 378–87.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Goetz, Edward G., Tom R. Tyler and Fay Lomax Cook. 1984. “Promised Incentives in Media Research.”Journal of Marketing Research 21 (May): 148–54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Goydon, Raymond. 1984. “Phantom Products.” Forbes (May 21): 202.Google Scholar
  8. Hawkins, Del I. and Kenneth A. Coney. 1981. “Uninformed Response Error in Survey Research.”Journal of Marketing Research 18 (August): 370–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Jones, Wesley H. and James R. Lang 1980. “Sample Composition Bias in a Mail Survey: A Comparison of Inducement Methods.”Journal of Marketing Research 17 (February): 69–76.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. McDaniel, Stephen W. and C. P. Rao. 1980. “The Effect of Monetary Inducement on Mailed Questionnaire Response Quality.”Journal of Marketing Research 17 (May): 265–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Presser, Stanley. 1984. “Is Inaccuracy on Factual Survey Items Item-Specific or Respondent-Specific?”Public Opinion Quarterly 48 (Spring): 344–355.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Schneider, Kenneth C., 1985. “Uninformed Response Rates in Survey Research: New Evidence.”Journal of Business Research 130 (April): 153–162.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Schuman, Howard and Stanley Presser. 1981.Questions and Answers in Attitude Surveys. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
  14. Winer, B. J., 1971.Statistical Principles in Experimental Design. New York: McGraw-Hill Publishing Co.Google Scholar
  15. Wotruba, Thomas R., 1966. “Monetary Inducements and Mail Questionnaire Response.”Journal of Marketing Research 3, (November): 398–400.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Academy of Marketing Science 1988

Authors and Affiliations

  • I. Del Hawkins
    • 1
  • Kenneth A. Coney
    • 2
  • Donald W. Jackson
    • 2
  1. 1.University of OregonEugeneUSA
  2. 2.Arizona State UniversityUSA

Personalised recommendations