IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/jassam/v13y2025i2p223-240..html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Unconditional Lotteries in Web Surveys—Evidence from a Large-Scale Experiment

Author

Listed:
  • Helge Holtermann
  • Siv-Elisabeth Skjelbred
  • Vegard Wiborg

Abstract

Extensive research suggests that upfront unconditional payments boost response rates compared to a promised payment conditional upon completion. However, we do not know whether the benefits of unconditionality also apply to lottery incentives, which are now commonly used. This study examines how unconditional lotteries affect response rates by randomly allocating sample members in a large web-survey of Norwegian master’s graduates (N = 11,291) to three groups—no-incentive, unconditional lottery, and conditional lottery—during the winter 2021/2022. Comparing response rates across treatments, we find that the unconditional lottery incentive does not outperform the conditional lottery incentive, but both types of lottery incentives modestly boost the response rate compared to no incentive. Moreover, although respondents differ from the population on some background characteristics, the lottery incentives neither alleviate nor increase this bias.

Suggested Citation

Handle: RePEc:oup:jassam:v:13:y:2025:i:2:p:223-240.
as

Download full text from publisher

File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1093/jssam/smae044
Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
---><---

As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to

for a different version of it.

More about this item

Keywords

;
;
;
;

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:oup:jassam:v:13:y:2025:i:2:p:223-240.. 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: Oxford University Press (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://academic.oup.com/jssam .

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.