1
|
Stoffel ST, Chaki B, Vlaev I. Testing a decoy donation incentive to improve online survey participation: Evidence from a field experiment. PLoS One 2024; 19:e0299711. [PMID: 38422074 PMCID: PMC10903882 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0299711] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/09/2023] [Accepted: 02/13/2024] [Indexed: 03/02/2024] Open
Abstract
This study introduces a new randomized field experiment exploring the impact of offering a decoy charity donation incentive together with a monetary reward to increase response rates in an online survey about coronavirus fears. The study used a two-stage approach, starting with a preliminary survey to investigate participant attitudes toward different types of donations. Subsequently, an experiment was conducted wherein a less desirable £2 donation (the decoy) was introduced as an alternative to a £2 Amazon voucher (the target) within the choice set. The study sample consisted of 431 university students. They were split into three groups: a control group with a standard £2 Amazon voucher incentive (216 participants), a decoy group with the target shown first (108 participants), and a decoy group with the decoy shown first (107 participants). We found significantly higher survey completion rates in the decoy than in the control condition (82.3% vs. 74.5%). Notably, an order effect was observed-presenting the target before the decoy led to a higher completion rate (89.8%) compared to presenting the decoy first (74.8%). Importantly, the inclusion of the decoy incentive did not introduce any response bias. This study offers a proof of principle that incorporating a decoy charity donation incentive into the choice set can have a positive impact on survey participation without adversely affecting response behaviour. It demonstrates the potential of such incentives to encourage participants to complete online surveys, even when a small monetary reward is offered.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Sandro Tiziano Stoffel
- Research Department of Behavioural Science and Health, UCL, London, United Kingdom
- Institute of Pharmaceutical Medicine, University of Basel, Basel, Switzerland
| | - Biswajit Chaki
- Warwick Business School, University of Warwick, Coventry, United Kingdom
| | - Ivo Vlaev
- Warwick Business School, University of Warwick, Coventry, United Kingdom
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Polyakov A, Rozen G, Lensen S, Shoham G, Weissman A, Mizrachi Y. Providers' attitudes towards payment to egg donors: an international survey. HUM FERTIL 2023; 26:1439-1447. [PMID: 37815388 DOI: 10.1080/14647273.2023.2265151] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/22/2023] [Accepted: 09/10/2023] [Indexed: 10/11/2023]
Abstract
The research question 'How do fertility professionals worldwide perceive the issue of payment for egg donation and does this view change under different circumstances?' was addressed. A worldwide online survey was conducted between January and March 2023, focusing on the views of fertility providers concerning egg donor payments. From the 3,790 IVF-Worldwide.com members invited, 532 (14%) from 88 countries responded. The majority of participants, primarily from Europe (38.9%) and Asia (20.1%), were fertility specialists, embryologists, and fertility nurses. Most (60.3%) favoured regulated donor compensation, with only 13% advocating for unrestricted amounts. Compensation opposition (22.4%) was often rooted in concerns about donors' best interests. When considering egg donation from low-resource to high-resource countries, 38.5% were opposed. When asked about compensating women who underwent elective, non-medical egg freezing should they choose to donate their unused oocytes, most responders supported it to some degree, with only 28.4% opposing any compensation. The survey revealed that a significant majority of fertility professionals worldwide are supportive of some form of compensation for egg donors. However, perspectives diverge depending on the specific scenario and the country of practice.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Alex Polyakov
- Reproductive Services Unit, The Royal Women's Hospital, Parkville, Australia
- Department of O&G, University of Melbourne, The Royal Women's Hospital, Victoria, Australia
- Melbourne IVF, East Melbourne, Australia
| | - Genia Rozen
- Reproductive Services Unit, The Royal Women's Hospital, Parkville, Australia
- Department of O&G, University of Melbourne, The Royal Women's Hospital, Victoria, Australia
- Melbourne IVF, East Melbourne, Australia
| | - Sarah Lensen
- Department of O&G, University of Melbourne, The Royal Women's Hospital, Victoria, Australia
| | - Gon Shoham
- Faculty of Medicine, Tel-Aviv University, Tel-Aviv, Israel
- General Surgery Division, Tel Aviv Sourasky Medical Center, Tel Aviv, Israel
| | - Ariel Weissman
- Faculty of Medicine, Tel-Aviv University, Tel-Aviv, Israel
- IVF Unit, Holon, Israel
| | - Yossi Mizrachi
- Faculty of Medicine, Tel-Aviv University, Tel-Aviv, Israel
- IVF Unit, Holon, Israel
| |
Collapse
|