CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 705Survey Methodology and NonresponseSurvey Sampling and Estimation TechniquesCensus and Population Estimation

Estimating the Effect of Incentives on Mail Survey Response Rates: A Meta-Analysis

Church, Allan H.·1993·Public Opinion Quarterly
DOI 10.1086/269355
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

This article reports the results of a meta-analysis of 38 experimental and quasi-experimental studies that implemented some form of mail survey incentive in order to increase response rates. A total of 74 observations or cases were classified into one of four types of incentive groups: those using prepaid monetary or nonmonetary rewards included with the initial survey mailing and those using monetary or nonmonetary rewards as conditional upon the return of the survey. Results were generated using an analysis of variance approach. The overall effect size across the 74 observations was reported as low to moderate at d = .241. When compared across incentive types, only those surveys that included rewards (both monetary and nonmonetary) in the initial mailing yielded statistically significant estimates of effect size (d = .347, d = .136). The average increase in response rates over control conditions for these types of incentives was 19.1 percent and 7.9 percent, respectively. There was no evidence of any impact for those incentive types offering rewards contingent upon the return of the survey.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1086/269355

Cites

37 of 37 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • A meta-analysis confirmed that an unconditional advance payment increases survey response rate.

    “The result of this study has also been confirmed by the meta-analysis of Church (1993).”

    From Psychological foundations of incentives (2002) · cites this paper as Church 1993

  • An unconditional advance payment increases survey response rate by 19 percentage points relative to surveys without payment.

    “Church reports that if the request for the completion and return of a survey is associated with an unconditional advance payment the response rate increases by 19 percentage points relative to surveys without concomitant payment.”

    From Psychological foundations of incentives (2002) · cites this paper as Church 1993

  • When payment is contingent upon completion of the survey, the response rate does not rise relative to no payment.

    “Moreover, when the payment of money is made contingent upon completion of the survey the response rate does not rise relative to the case where no payment is offered.”

    From Psychological foundations of incentives (2002) · cites this paper as Church 1993

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Church, A. H.
Affiliations
Columbia University (US)
Corresponding author
Church, Allan H.
ORCID
Church, Allan H.
Venue
Public Opinion Quarterly
Publisher
Oxford University Press (OUP)
Published
1993
Volume
57
Issue
1
Pages
62
ISSN
0033-362X (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1086/269355
OpenAlex
W2006867740
Cited by
705
References
37
Citations by year
2026: 9 · 2025: 8 · 2024: 13 · 2023: 23 · 2022: 22 · 2021: 26 · 2020: 24 · 2019: 25 · 2018: 18 · 2017: 27 · 2016: 32 · 2015: 37 · 2014: 34 · 2013: 39 · 2012: 37
FWCI
23.80
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Public Opinion Quarterly (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Survey Methodology and Nonresponse
  • Physical Sciences › Mathematics › Statistics and Probability › Survey Sampling and Estimation Techniques
  • Physical Sciences › Mathematics › Statistics and Probability › Census and Population Estimation
Keywords
mail survey response rates, survey incentives, monetary rewards, contingent reward, survey nonresponse

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review