IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/cup/pscirm/v13y2025i4p1055-1064_18.html

Differential efficacy of survey incentives across contexts: experimental evidence from Australia, India, and the United States

Author

Listed:
  • Conn, Katharine
  • Mo, Cecilia Hyunjung
  • Purohit, Bhumi

Abstract

Scholars often use monetary incentives to boost participation rates in online surveys. This technique follows existing literature from western countries, which suggests egoistic incentives effectively boost survey participation. Positing that incentives’ effectiveness vary by country context, we tested this proposition through an experiment in Australia, India, and the USA. We compared three types of monetary lotteries to narrative and altruistic appeals. We find that egoistic rewards are most effective in the USA and to some extent, in Australia. In India, respondents are just as responsive to altruistic incentives as to egoistic incentives. Results from an adapted dictator game corroborate these patterns. Our results caution scholars against exporting survey participation incentives to areas where they have not been tested.

Suggested Citation

  • Conn, Katharine & Mo, Cecilia Hyunjung & Purohit, Bhumi, 2025. "Differential efficacy of survey incentives across contexts: experimental evidence from Australia, India, and the United States," Political Science Research and Methods, Cambridge University Press, vol. 13(4), pages 1055-1064, October.
  • Handle: RePEc:cup:pscirm:v:13:y:2025:i:4:p:1055-1064_18
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.cambridge.org/core/product/identifier/S2049847024000530/type/journal_article
    File Function: link to article abstract page
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:cup:pscirm:v:13:y:2025:i:4:p:1055-1064_18. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Kirk Stebbing (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.cambridge.org/ram .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.