The Effects of a Between-Wave Incentive Experiment on Contact Update and Production Outcomes in a Panel Study

Bornstein, R.F. (1989). Exposure and Affect: Overview and Metaanalysis of Research, 1968-1987. Psychological Bulletin, 106, 265-289.10.1037/0033-2909.106.2.265Search in Google Scholar

Budowski, M. and Scherpenzeel, A. (2005). Encouraging and Maintaining Participation in Household Surveys: The Case of the Swiss Household Panel. ZUMA-Nachrichten, 56, 10-36.Search in Google Scholar

Calderwood, L. (2010). Keeping in Touch with Mobile Families in the UK Millennium Cohort Study. Centre for Longitudinal Studies Working Paper Series 2010/7. London: Centre for Longitudinal Studies.Search in Google Scholar

Couper, M.P. and Ofstedal, M.B. (2009). Keeping in Contact with Mobile Sample Members. Methodology of Longitudinal Surveys, P. Lynn (ed.). New York: Wiley, 188-203.10.1002/9780470743874.ch11Search in Google Scholar

De Leeuw, E., Callegaro, M., Hox, J., Korendijk, E., and Lensvelt-Mulders, G. (2007). The Influence of Advance Letters on Response in Telephone Surveys: A Meta-Analysis. Public Opinion Quarterly, 71, 413-443.10.1093/poq/nfm014Search in Google Scholar

Duncan, D.B. (1955). Multiple Range and Multiple F Tests. Biometrics, 11, 1-42.10.2307/3001478Search in Google Scholar

Fumagalli, L., Laurie, H., and Lynn, P. (2010). Experiments with Methods to Reduce Attrition in Longitudinal Surveys. Institute for Social and Economic Research Working Paper 2010-04. Colchester: University of Essex.Search in Google Scholar

James, T.L. (1997). Results of the Wave 1 Incentive Experiment in the 1996 Survey of Income and Program Participation. Proceedings of the Survey Research Methods Section of the American Statistical Association. Washington, DC: American Statistical Association, 834-839.Search in Google Scholar

Laurie, H. (2007). The Effect Of Increasing Financial Incentives In A Panel Survey: An Experiment On The British Household Panel Survey, Wave 14. ISER Working Paper, No. 2007-05. Colchester: University of Essex. Available at: www.iser.essex.ac.uk/pubs/workpaps/pdf/2007-05.pdf (Accessed May 31, 2012).Search in Google Scholar

Laurie, H., Smith, R., and Scott, L. (1999). Strategies for Reducing Nonresponse in a Longitudinal Panel Survey. Journal of Official Statistics, 15, 269-282.Search in Google Scholar

Laurie, H. and Lynn, P. (2009). The Use of Respondent Incentives on Longitudinal Surveys. Methodology of Longitudinal Surveys, P. Lynn (ed.). New York: Wiley, 205-233.10.1002/9780470743874.ch12Search in Google Scholar

Lee, A.Y. (2001). The Mere Exposure Effect: An Uncertainty Reduction Explanation Revisited. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 27, 1255-1266.10.1177/01461672012710002Search in Google Scholar

Mack, S., Huggins, V., Keathley, D., and Sundukchi, M. (1998). Do Monetary Incentives Improve Response Rates in the Survey of Income And Program Participation? Proceedings of the American Statistical Association, Survey Research Methods Section. Washington, DC: American Statistical Association, 529-534.Search in Google Scholar

Martin, E., Abreu, D., and Winters, F. (2001). Money and Motive: Effects of Incentives on Panel Attrition in the Survey of Income and Program Participation. Journal of Official Statistics, 17, 267-284.Search in Google Scholar

McGonagle, K.A., Schoeni, R.F., Sastry, N., and Freedman, V.A. (2012). The Panel Study of Income Dynamics: Overview, Recent Innovations, and Potential for Life Course Research. Longitudinal and Life Course Studies, 3, 268-284.Search in Google Scholar

McGonagle, K.A., Couper, M.P., and Schoeni, R.F. (2011). Keeping Track of Panel Members: An Experimental Test of a Between-Wave Contact Strategy. Journal of Official Statistics, 27, 319-338.Search in Google Scholar

Panel Study of Income Dynamics, public use dataset (2009). Produced and distributed by the Institute for Social Research, Survey Research Center. Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan.Search in Google Scholar

Ribisl, K.M., Walton, M.A., Mowbray, C.T., Luke, D.A., Davidson, W.S., and Bootsmiller, B.J. (1996). Minimizing Participant Attrition in Panel Studies Through the Use of Effective Retention and Tracing Strategies: Review and Recommendations. Evaluation and Program Planning, 19, 1-25.10.1016/0149-7189(95)00037-2Search in Google Scholar

Rodgers, W. (2002). Size of Incentive Effects in a Longitudinal Study. Proceedings of the Survey Research Methods Section of the American Statistical Association. Washington, DC: American Statistical Association, 2930-2935.Search in Google Scholar

Ryu, E., Couper, M.P., and Marans, R.W. (2006). Survey Incentives: Cash vs In-kind; Face-to-face vs Mail; Response Rate vs Nonresponse Error. International Journal of Public Opinion Research, 18, 89-106.10.1093/ijpor/edh089Search in Google Scholar

Scherpenzeel, A., Zimmermann, E., Budowski, M., Tillmann, R., Wernli, B., and Gabadinho, A. (2002). Experimental Pre-Test of the Biographical Questionnaire, Working Paper, No. 5-02. Neuchatel: Swiss Household Panel. Available at: http://aresoas.unil.ch/workingpapers/WP5_02.pdf. (Accessed May 31, 2012).Search in Google Scholar

Singer, E. (2002). The Use of Incentives to Reduce Nonresponse in Household Surveys.Survey Nonresponse, R.M. Groves, D.A. Dillman, J.L. Eltinge, and R.J.A. Little (eds). New York: Wiley, 163-177.Search in Google Scholar

Singer, E., Gebler, N., Raghunathan, T., van Hoewyk, J., and McGonagle, K. (1999a). The Effect of Incentives in Telephone and Face-to-Face Surveys. Journal of Official Statistics, 15, 217-230.Search in Google Scholar

Singer, E., van Hoewyk, J., and Gebler, N. (1999b). The Effect of Incentives on Response Rates in Interviewer-Mediated Surveys. Journal of Official Statistics, 15, 217-230. Search in Google Scholar