ArticleField methods2020
The Effectiveness of Incentives on Completion Rates, Data Quality, and Nonresponse Bias in a Probability-based Internet Panel Survey.
Article in Field methods, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
8 citing papers in PubMed.
- Preference for supplementary voluntary health insurance and heterogeneity in China: a discrete choice experiment.Health policy and planning · 2026Article
- A Primer of Data Cleaning in Quantitative Research: Handling Missing Values and Outliers.Journal of advanced nursing · 2026Article
- Design and implementation of data quality controls in the EQ-DAPHNIE study: insights from the pilot phase and 15-country analysis.Quality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation · 2025Article
- The Impact of Incentives on Data Collection for Online Surveys: Social Media Recruitment Study.JMIR formative research · 2024Article
- Human biomonitoring without in-person interaction: public health engagements during the COVID-19 pandemic and future implications.BMC medical research methodology · 2024Article
- Quality of Life and Emotional Problems of COVID-19 Patients after Discharge: A One-Month Longitudinal Study.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- How supermarket retailers value business outcomes of healthy food retail strategies: a discrete choice experiment.Frontiers in public health · 2024Article
- Stratified Impacts of the Infodemic During the COVID-19 Pandemic: Cross-sectional Survey in 6 Asian Jurisdictions.Journal of medical Internet research · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Previous research has shown that increasing the size of incentives can increase response rates for probability-based, cross-sectional surveys. However, the effects of incentives on web panels have not been extensively studied. We sought to answer the question: What is the effect of larger, postpaid incentives on (1) response, (2) data quality, and (3) nonresponse bias for individuals in a web panel? We analyzed data from the 2015 and 2016 National Internet Flu Survey, a survey that uses the GfK KnowledgePanel
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.