Supplemental Power Point

AAPOR_2012_GMooney NO (4) FINAL .pptx

Evaluation of the Unemployment Compensation Provisions of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009

Supplemental Power Point

OMB: 1225-0089

Document [pptx]
Download: pptx | pdf

Influencing Mode Choice in a
Multi-Mode Survey

May 2012

AAPOR Conference Presentation

Geraldine Mooney Cheryl De Saw  Xiaojing Lin

Andrew Hurwitz Flora Lan

<number>

<number>

 
    • Potential Advantages 

        • Lower data collection costs 

    • Potential Disadvantages 

        •  Pushing sample members in a direction they don’t want to go, might negatively impact the response rate 

The Research Issue

<number>

<number>

<number>

 

  • 2008 National Survey of Recent College Graduates (NSRCG) 

    •  Sponsored by the National Science Foundation 

    • Conducted every two to three years since 1974 

    • Sample:18,000 recent bachelor’s and master’s degree graduates  in the sciences, health and engineering   

  • Increasing Data Collection Costs 

    • Locating challenge 

    • Difficult to motivate 

  • 2008 NSRCG Mode and Incentive Experiment 

    • Looked at the extent to which incentives and mode can be   used to increase web completes and/or response rates 

Why are We Interested?

<number>

<number>

<number>

 

Web Outcomes When Web and Paper Offered Simultaneously:

  • Quigley et al (2000): In a sample of  active military personal, military wives, civilians and reservists, 23% responded by web  

    • 73% when web and paper were offered sequentially, although the response rate dropped slightly 

  • Schonlau, Asch, and Can (2003): In a sample of high school graduates going off to college, about 1/3 responded by web  

  • Millar and Dillman (2011): In a sample of college students, 53% responded by web when both email and postal reminders were sent  

    • 43% if only postal reminders were sent 

Web Completes in Multiple Mode Surveys

<number>

<number>

<number>

 

     Multi-Mode Approach : A Viable Means for Combating Declining

                                             Response Rates But Results Not Uniform

    • Groves & Kahn (1979), Tarnai & Paxton (2004):  Respondents have mode preferences; multi-mode surveys  

    • Dillman (2009), Mooney et. al. (2007):  Rather than increase response rate, additional modes migrate completes from one mode to another 

    • Millar & Dillman (2011):  “Modest” support for choice lowering response; when offered sequentially, web and paper are as effective as paper only 

    • Grigorian (2008): 2006 Survey of Doctorate Recipients offered sample members their preferred mode when possible, did not improve response  

    • Olson, Smyth, Wood (2010): In a mode preference study, regardless of mode preference, when offered first, respondents responded by paper 

Response Rates in Multi-Mode Surveys

<number>

<number>

<number>

 

Randomly assigned sample (17,851) into 8 groups defined by:

    • Initial Response Mode: Two Alternatives 

      • Web Only:  Paper questionnaire not sent until the 2nd survey mailing 

      • Web/Paper:  Paper questionnaire sent in both the initial and 2nd survey mailings 

    • Incentive Amount (postpaid): None,  $20,  $20-$30 differential 

    • Timing of the Incentive: 1st mailing or 2nd mailing 

Compared web completes/response rates at 3 time points

    • T1: Immediately Prior to Second Mailing (12/8/08) 

    • T2: At Start of CATI Follow-Up (12/17/08) 

    • T3: Six Weeks After Start of CATI Follow-Up (1/28/09) 

2008 NSRCG Incentive and Mode Choice Experiment

<number>

<number>

<number>

 

Groups

First  Mailing

Second Mailing

Sample Size

Web First

   

Group 1

No incentive

No incentive

3,569

Group 2

$20

$20

1,785

Group 3

No incentive

$20/$30 web

1,786

Mail/Web

   

Group 4

No incentive

No incentive

3,571

Group 5

$20

$20

1,784

Group 6

No incentive

$20/$30 web

1,786

Group 7

$20/$30 web

$20/$30 web

1,785

Group 8

No incentive

$20

1,785

Total

  

17,851

2008 NSRCG Treatment Groups

<number>

<number>

<number>

 
  • Will limiting the initial response mode to web only: 

    • Increase web completes over simultaneously offering both paper and web?  

      • Our expectation: Yes 

    • Negatively impact the response rate in a multi-mode survey?  

      • Our expectation: No 

Limiting the Initial Mode Research Questions

<number>

<number>

<number>

 
  • Will Offering a Differential Incentive that Favors Web Completes: 

    • Increase web completes more than no incentive or an incentive that rewards completes in any mode equally? 

      • Our expectation: Yes 

    • Increase the overall response rate more than an incentive that rewards all completes equally? 

      • Our expectation: Yes 

The Differential Incentive Research Questions

<number>

<number>

<number>

 

Findings

<number>

<number>

<number>

 

Limiting Initial Response Mode to Web Only: Impact on Web Completes

<number>

Groups

N

Prior to

Second

Mailing

Start of

CATI

Follow-Up

After Six

Weeks of

CATI

Web First Total (1-3)

7,140

97.0%

95.3%

75.5%

Web/paper Total (4-6)

7,141

58.9%

59.4%

57.9%

 

<number>

<number>

 

Limiting Initial Response Mode to Web Only: Impact on Response Rates

<number>

Groups

N

Prior to

Second

Mailing

Start of

CATI

Follow-Up

After Six

Weeks of

CATI

Web First Total (1-3)

7,140

18.4%

22.0%

44.4%

Web/Paper Total (4-6)

7,141

19.7%

22.8%

44.3%

No significant difference between mode comparison groups

<number>

<number>

 

Web First

Groups

Incentive

Mailing

N

Prior to

Second

Mailing

Start of

CATI

Follow-Up

After Six
Weeks of
CATI

3

$20-$30

2nd Mailing

1,786

98.0%

95.6%

79.9%

2

$20

Both Mailings

1,785

96.2%

94.8%

78.7%

1

None

 

3,569

96.8%

95.3%

71.6%

Differential Incentive: Web Completes in Web First Groups

<number>

<number>

<number>

 

Web/Paper

Groups

Incentive

Mailing

N

Prior to

Second

Mailing

Start of

CATI

Follow-Up

After Six
Weeks of
CATI

7

$20-$30

Both Mailings

1,785

91.6%

91.1%

81.7%

6

$20-$30

2nd Mailing

1,786

56.8%

62.1%

64.7%

5

$20

Both Mailings

1,784

64.7%

64.7%

59.8%

8

$20

2nd Mailing

1,785

54.5%

56.3%

54.3%

4

None

 

3,571

57.0%

58.1%

53.6%

Differential Incentive: Web Completes in Web/Paper Groups

<number>

<number>

<number>

 

Web/Paper

Groups

Incentive

Mailing

N

Prior to

Second

Mailing

Start of

CATI

Follow-Up

After Six
Weeks of
CATI

7

$20-$30

Both Mailings

1,785

91.6%

91.1%

81.7%

6

$20-$30

2nd Mailing

1,786

56.8%

62.1%

64.7%

5

$20

Both Mailings

1,784

64.7%

64.7%

59.8%

8

$20

2nd Mailing

1,785

54.5%

56.3%

54.3%

4

None

 

3,571

57.0%

58.1%

53.6%

Differential Incentive: Web Completes in Web/Paper Groups

<number>

<number>

<number>

 

Web/Paper

Groups

Incentive

Mailing

N

Prior to

Second

Mailing

Start of

CATI

Follow-Up

After Six
Weeks of
CATI

7

$20-$30

Both Mailings

1,785

91.6%

91.1%

81.7%

6

$20-$30

2nd Mailing

1,786

56.8%

62.1%

64.7%

5

$20

Both Mailings

1,784

64.7%

64.7%

59.8%

8

$20

2nd Mailing

1,785

54.5%

56.3%

54.3%

4

None

 

3,571

57.0%

58.1%

53.6%

Differential Incentive: Web Completes in Web/Paper Groups

<number>

<number>

<number>

 

Table 5    Response Rates by Initial Response Mode and Type of Incentive

Group

Incentive

Prior to

Second

Mailing

Start of

CATI

Follow-Up

After Six
Weeks of
CATI

Web First

    

1

None

16.0%

17.9%

40.0%

2

$20/$20 both mailings

24.0%

29.1%

48.2%

3

None/$20/30

16.6%

23.1%

49.5%

Paper/Web

    

4

None

16.7%

18.8%

39.8%

5

$20/$20 both mailings

26.3%***

29.7%***

49.9%*

6

None/$20/30

19.3%

24.0%

47.7%

7

$20/$30 both mailings

28.6%

32.7%**

52.8%*

8

None/$20

17.9

22.6%

46.4%

Group 7  vs. Group 5  p< .05 at T2** and p <.1 at T3*

Group 3  vs. Group 5  p< 0001 at T1,T2*** and p <.1 at T3*

Differential Incentive: Response Rate Comparisons

<number>

T

<number>

<number>

 

Table 5    Response Rates by Initial Response Mode and Type of Incentive

Group

Incentive

Prior to

Second

Mailing

Start of

CATI

Follow-Up

After Six
Weeks of
CATI

Web First

    

1

None

16.0%

17.9%

40.0%

2

$20/$20 both mailings

24.0%

29.1%

48.2%

3

None/$20/30

16.6%

23.1%

49.5%

Paper/Web

    

4

None

16.7%

18.8%

39.8%

5

$20/$20 both mailings

26.3%***

29.7%***

49.9%*

6

None/$20/30

19.3%

24.0%

47.7%

7

$20/$30 both mailings

28.6%

32.7%**

52.8%*

8

None/$20

17.9

22.6%

46.4%

Group 7  vs. Group 5  p< .05 at T2** and p <.1 at T3*

Group 3  vs. Group 5  p< 0001 at T1,T2*** and p <.1 at T3*

Differential Incentive: Response Rate Comparisons

<number>

 

Table 5    Response Rates by Initial Response Mode and Type of Incentive

Group

Incentive

Prior to

Second

Mailing

Start of

CATI

Follow-Up

After Six
Weeks of
CATI

Web First

    

1

None

16.0%

17.9%

40.0%

2

$20/$20 both mailings

24.0%

29.1%

48.2%

3

None/$20/30

16.6%

23.1%

49.5%

Paper/Web

    

4

None

16.7%

18.8%

39.8%

5

$20/$20 both mailings

26.3%***

29.7%***

49.9%*

6

None/$20/30

19.3%

24.0%

47.7%

7

$20/$30 both mailings

28.6%

32.7%**

52.8%*

8

None/$20

17.9

22.6%

46.4%

Group 7  vs. Group 5  p< .05 at T2** and p <.1 at T3*

Group 3  vs. Group 5  p< 0001 at T1,T2*** and p <.1 at T3*

Differential Incentive: Response Rate Comparisons

<number>

 

Table 5    Response Rates by Initial Response Mode and Type of Incentive

Group

Incentive

Prior to

Second

Mailing

Start of

CATI

Follow-Up

After Six
Weeks of
CATI

Web First

    

1

None

16.0%

17.9%

40.0%

2

$20/$20 both mailings

24.0%

29.1%

48.2%

3

None/$20/30

16.6%

23.1%

49.5%

Paper/Web

    

4

None

16.7%

18.8%

39.8%

5

$20/$20 both mailings

26.3%***

29.7%***

49.9%*

6

None/$20/30

19.3%

24.0%

47.7%

7

$20/$30 both mailings

28.6%

32.7%**

52.8%*

8

None/$20

17.9

22.6%

46.4%

Group 7  vs. Group 5  p< .05 at T2** and p <.1 at T3*

Group 3  vs. Group 5  p< 0001 at T1,T2*** and p <.1 at T3*

Differential Incentive: Response Rate Comparisons

<number>

 

Conclusions

<number>

<number>

<number>

 
  • Limiting the initial response mode to web only  

    • Significantly increased web completes 

    • No negative impact on response rate 

  • The differential incentive  

    • Significantly increased web completes among the Web/Paper groups 

    • Modest impact on response rates  

  • Of the 3 groups with the highest response rates, 2 offered differential incentives. Why might that be? 

    • Using Barry Schwartz’s Paradox of Choice (2004) thesis, Millar and Dillman (2011) suggest choice increases cognitive burden, thus lowering response, especially if no compelling reason for mode choice is evident 

    • A differential incentive, by rewarding one mode over another, provides a compelling reason, thus minimizing cognitive burden while rewarding respondents for choosing our preferred mode 

Our Main “Take Away” Points

<number>

<number>

<number>

 
  • Use a sequential approach  

    • Begin with web only  

    • Introduce paper questionnaire in the 2nd mailing 

  • Include a differential incentive in the 2nd mailing 

    • Minimizes the cognitive burden associated with selecting a mode  

    • Rewards respondent for using our preferred mode 

Best Practices for Influencing Web Completes

<number>

<number>

<number>

 
  • Please contact: 

    • Author 1 

For More Information

<number>

<number>

<number>

 
File Typeapplication/vnd.openxmlformats-officedocument.presentationml.presentation
File Modified0000-00-00
File Created0000-00-00

© 2024 OMB.report | Privacy Policy