How different types of participant payments alter task performance
Journal Title: Judgment and Decision Making - Year 2009, Vol 4, Issue 5
Abstract
Researchers typically use incentives (such as money or course credit) in order to obtain participants who engage in the specific behaviors of interest to the researcher. There is, however, little understanding or agreement on the effects of different types and levels of incentives used. Some results in the domain of statistical reasoning suggest that performance differences — previously deemed theoretically important — may actually be due to differences in incentive types across studies. 704 participants completed one of five variants of a statistical reasoning task, for which they received either course credit, flat fee payment, or performance-based payment incentives. Successful task completion was more frequent with performance-based incentives than with either of the other incentive types. Performance on moderately difficult tasks (compared to very easy and very hard tasks) was most sensitive to incentives. These results can help resolve existing debates about inconsistent findings, guide more accurate comparisons across studies, and be applied beyond research settings.
Authors and Affiliations
Gary L. Brase
Keywords
Related Articles
- EP ID EP677697
- DOI -
- Views 159
- Downloads 0
The relationship between intertemporal choice and following the path of least resistance across choices, preferences, and beliefs
The degree to which individuals prefer smaller sooner versus larger delayed rewards serves as a powerful predictor of their impulsivity towards a number of different kinds of rewards. Here we test the limits of its predi...
Behind the veil of ignorance: Self-serving bias in climate change negotiations
Slowing climate change will almost certainly require a reduction in greenhouse gas emissions, but agreement on who should reduce emissions by how much is difficult, in part because of the self-serving bias—the tendency t...
Choosing with confidence: Self-efficacy and preferences for choice
Previous research on the role of choice set size in decision making has focused on decision outcomes and satisfaction. In contrast, little is known about interindividual differences in preferences for larger versus small...
Cross-national in-group favoritism in prosocial behavior: Evidence from Latin and North America
As individuals from different nations increasingly interact with each other, research on national in-group favoritism becomes particularly vital. In a cross-national, large-scale study (N = 915) including representative...
Ability, chance, and ambiguity aversion: Revisiting the competence hypothesis
Individuals are often ambiguity-averse when choosing among purely chance-based prospects (Ellsberg, 1961). However, they often prefer apparently ambiguous ability-based prospects to unambiguous chance-based prospects. Ac...