IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ese/iserwp/2007-05.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

The effect of increasing financial incentives in a panel survey: an experiment on the British Household Panel Survey, Wave 14

Author

Listed:
  • Laurie, Heather

Abstract

This descriptive paper reports the results of an experiment carried out at wave 14 (2004) of the British Household Panel Survey (BHPS). A split-sample design was used to assess the effect on response rates of increasing the monetary incentive given to survey respondents from £7 per interview to £10 per interview. The results suggest that even though the increase was relatively small, response rates were higher for those receiving the increased incentive amount, an effect that varied by the demographic characteristics and previous response history of respondents.

Suggested Citation

  • Laurie, Heather, 2007. "The effect of increasing financial incentives in a panel survey: an experiment on the British Household Panel Survey, Wave 14," ISER Working Paper Series 2007-05, Institute for Social and Economic Research.
    • Handle: RePEc:ese:iserwp:2007-05
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.iser.essex.ac.uk/wp-content/uploads/files/working-papers/iser/2007-05.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Lynn, Peter & Jäckle, Annette & Burton, Jonathan & Buck, Nick & Laurie, Heather, 2005. "A review of methodological research pertinent to longitudinal survey design and data collection," ISER Working Paper Series 2005-29, Institute for Social and Economic Research.
    2. F. Thomas Juster & Richard Suzman, 1995. "An Overview of the Health and Retirement Study," Journal of Human Resources, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 30, pages 7-56.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Sascha Becker & Dolores Messer & Stefan C. Wolter & Sascha O. Becker, 2011. "A Gift is not Always a Gift: Gift Exchange in a Voucher Experiment," CESifo Working Paper Series 3488, CESifo.
    2. Sascha O. Becker & Dolores Messer & Stefan C. Wolter, 2013. "A Gift is Not Always a Gift: Heterogeneity and Long-term Effects in a Gift Exchange Experiment," Economica, London School of Economics and Political Science, vol. 80(318), pages 345-371, April.
    3. McGonagle Katherine A. & Schoeni Robert F. & Couper Mick P., 2013. "The Effects of a Between-Wave Incentive Experiment on Contact Update and Production Outcomes in a Panel Study," Journal of Official Statistics, Sciendo, vol. 29(2), pages 261-276, September.
    4. Burton, Jonathan & Laurie, Heather & Uhrig, S.C. Noah & Bryan, Mark L. & Desousa, Carol & Fumagalli, Laura & Jäckle, Annette & Knies, Gundi & Lynn, Peter & Nandi, Alita & Platt, Lucinda & Pudney, Ste, 2008. "Understanding Society. Some preliminary results from the Wave 1 Innovation Panel," Understanding Society Working Paper Series 2008-03, Understanding Society at the Institute for Social and Economic Research.
    5. Lynn, Peter & Laurie, Heather, 2008. "The use of respondent incentives on longitudinal surveys," ISER Working Paper Series 2008-42, Institute for Social and Economic Research.
    6. Pforr, Klaus & Blohm, Michael & Blom, Annelies G. & Erdel, Barbara & Felderer, Barbara & Fräßdorf, Mathis & Hajek, Kristin & Helmschrott, Susanne & Kleinert, Corinna & Koch, Achim & Krieger, Ulrich & , 2015. "Are Incentive Effects on Response Rates and Nonresponse Bias in Large-scale, Face-to-face Surveys Generalizable to Germany? Evidence from Ten Experiments," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 79(3), pages 740-768.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Lynn, Peter & Laurie, Heather, 2008. "The use of respondent incentives on longitudinal surveys," ISER Working Paper Series 2008-42, Institute for Social and Economic Research.
    2. Rashmita Basu, 2013. "Willingness-to-pay to prevent Alzheimer’s disease: a contingent valuation approach," International Journal of Health Economics and Management, Springer, vol. 13(3), pages 233-245, December.
    3. Elder, Harold W. & Rudolph, Patricia M., 2000. "Beliefs and actions: expectations and savings decisions by older Americans," Financial Services Review, Elsevier, vol. 9(1), pages 33-45, 00.
    4. Hugo Benitez-Silva & Moshe Buchinsky & John Rust & Emine Boz & Joseph B. Nichols & Sharbani Roy & Ignez Tristao, 2005. "Health Status, Insurance, and Expenditures in the Transition from Work to Retirement," Department of Economics Working Papers 05-11, Stony Brook University, Department of Economics.
    5. Wändi Bruine de Bruin & Michael F. Bryan & Simon M. Potter & Giorgio Topa & Wilbert Van der Klaauw, 2008. "Rethinking the measurement of household inflation expectations: preliminary findings," Staff Reports 359, Federal Reserve Bank of New York.
    6. Khwaja, Ahmed & Silverman, Dan & Sloan, Frank, 2007. "Time preference, time discounting, and smoking decisions," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 26(5), pages 927-949, September.
    7. Pamela Giustinelli & Charles F. Manski, 2018. "Survey Measures Of Family Decision Processes For Econometric Analysis Of Schooling Decisions," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 56(1), pages 81-99, January.
    8. Steven F. Venti & David A. Wise, 2001. "Choice, Chance, and Wealth Dispersion at Retirement," NBER Chapters, in: Aging Issues in the United States and Japan, pages 25-64, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    9. Gabriel A. Picone & Frank Sloan & Justin G. Trogdon, 2004. "The effect of the tobacco settlement and smoking bans on alcohol consumption," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 13(10), pages 1063-1080, October.
    10. Catherine Waddams Price & Karl Brazier & Khac Pham & Laurence Mathieu & Wenjia Wang, 2007. "Identifying Fuel Poverty Using Objective and Subjective Measures," Working Paper series, University of East Anglia, Centre for Competition Policy (CCP) 2007-11, Centre for Competition Policy, University of East Anglia, Norwich, UK..
    11. Axel Börsch-Supan & Tabea Bucher-Koenen & Felizia Hanemann, 2018. "Early Determinants of Work Disability in an International Perspective," NBER Working Papers 25142, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    12. Rietveld, Cornelius A. & Webbink, Dinand, 2016. "On the genetic bias of the quarter of birth instrument," Economics & Human Biology, Elsevier, vol. 21(C), pages 137-146.
    13. Christopher House & John Laitner & Dmitriy Stolyarov, 2008. "Valuing Lost Home Production Of Dual Earner Couples," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 49(2), pages 701-736, May.
    14. Hanming Fang & Michael P. Keane & Dan Silverman, 2008. "Sources of Advantageous Selection: Evidence from the Medigap Insurance Market," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 116(2), pages 303-350, April.
    15. Michael Hurd & Susann Rohwedder, 2006. "Alternative Measures of Replacement Rates," Working Papers wp132, University of Michigan, Michigan Retirement Research Center.
    16. Arun G. Chandrasekhar & Victor Chernozhukov & Francesca Molinari & Paul Schrimpf, 2019. "Best Linear Approximations to Set Identified Functions: With an Application to the Gender Wage Gap," NBER Working Papers 25593, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    17. Hurd, Michael D. & Rohwedder, Susann, 2023. "Spending trajectories after age 65 variation by initial wealth," The Journal of the Economics of Ageing, Elsevier, vol. 26(C).
    18. Michael Hurd & Arie Kapteyn, 2003. "Health, Wealth, and the Role of Institutions," Journal of Human Resources, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 38(2).
    19. Stefan Hochguertel & Henry Ohlsson, 2009. "Compensatory inter vivos gifts," Journal of Applied Econometrics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 24(6), pages 993-1023.
    20. Michael D. Hurd & Kathleen McGarry, 2002. "The Predictive Validity of Subjective Probabilities of Survival," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 112(482), pages 966-985, October.

    More about this item

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ese:iserwp:2007-05. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Jonathan Nears (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/rcessuk.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.