Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: https://hdl.handle.net/10419/319227 
Year of Publication: 
2025
Series/Report no.: 
CESifo Working Paper No. 11859
Publisher: 
CESifo GmbH, Munich
Abstract: 
Accurately measuring preferences and beliefs in surveys is crucial for social science research, but standard monetary incentives cannot be used when responses cannot be verified. We study two psychological mechanisms for improving answer quality that can be applied to unverifiable questions: (i) an unexpected bonus payment designed to trigger reciprocity towards the researcher, and (ii) telling respondents that they will later be paid to accurately restate their previously-given answers, which could motivate careful initial answers that are naturally easier to reconstruct. In a large online experiment (N=2,428), the bonus method modestly improves both answer correctness and consistency, driven by increased effort and reciprocity. The restatement method, however, does not consistently improve answer quality, primarily because participants exert effort trying to memorize their answers instead of answering carefully. These results demonstrate the potential and limitations of using psychological mechanisms to improve the quality of survey responses.
Subjects: 
restatement method
bonus method
incentives
survey.
JEL: 
C81
C83
C91
D91
Document Type: 
Working Paper
Appears in Collections:

Files in This Item:
File
Size





Items in EconStor are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.