Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38253624›Full record

ArticleScientific reports2024

Policy makers believe money motivates more than it does.

Sebastian Jilke, Florian Keppeler, John Ternovski, Dominik Vogel, Erez Yoeli

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Scientific reports, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Trial
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Sebastian JilkeGeorgetown University, 3700 O St NW, Washington, DC, USA. sebastian.jilke@georgetown.edu.
Florian KeppelerAarhus University, Bartholins Allé 7, 8000, Aarhus C, Denmark.
John TernovskiU.S. Airforce Academy, 2354 Fairchild Drive, Air Force Academy, CO, 80840, Germany.
Dominik VogelUniversity of Hamburg, Von-Melle-Park 9, 20146, Hamburg, Germany.
Erez YoeliMassachusetts Institute of Technology, 100 Main Street, Cambridge, MA, 02142, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

To motivate contributions to public goods, should policy makers employ financial incentives like taxes, fines, subsidies, and rewards? While these are widely considered as the classic policy approach, a substantial academic literature suggests the impact of financial incentives is not always positive; they can sometimes fail or even backfire. To test whether policy makers are overly bullish about financial incentives, we asked county heads, mayors, and municipal government representatives of medium-to-large towns in Germany to predict the effects of a financial incentive on COVID-19 vaccination, and tested the exact same incentive in a field experiment involving all 41,548 inhabitants (clustered in 10,032 addresses) of the German town of Ravensburg. Whereas policy makers overwhelmingly predict that the financial incentive will increase vaccination-by 15.3 percentage points on average-the same financial incentive yielded a precisely estimated null effect on vaccination. We discuss when financial incentives are most likely to fail, and conclude that it is critical to educate policy makers on the potential pitfalls of employing financial incentives to promote contributions to public goods.

Indexed as

Administrative PersonnelCOVID-19 VaccinesGermanyHumansLocal GovernmentPolicyCOVID-19 Vaccines

Identifiers

PMID38253624
PMCPMC10803740

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.