Randomised controlled trial of incentives to improve attendance
- Slides: 11
Randomised controlled trial of incentives to improve attendance at adult literacy classes Greg Brooks*, Maxine Burton*, Pam Cole*, Jeremy Miles**, Carole Torgerson*** and David Torgerson** g. brooks@shef. ac. uk *School of Education, University of Sheffield **York Trials Unit, Dept of Health Sciences, University of York ***Department of Educational Studies, University of York
Background • Poor adult literacy widespread problem • Regular attendance known to correlate with adult learners making better progress in reading. • No evidence from randomised controlled trials on incentives to attend.
Methods • Pragmatic cluster randomised controlled trial • Built on top of existing University of Sheffield Effective practice in reading study
Funding for main study Funding for trial ESF Df. ES Sf. LSU Io. E NRDC University of Sheffield (separate fund) Learners
• Ethical approval and informed consent obtained • 29 adult literacy classes allocated by York Trials Unit to two groups using minimisation • Classes mainly in East Midlands and North of England, with 3 outliers in South East • Main outcome: number of sessions attended • Secondary outcome: reading attainment (tests devised by NFER)
• Both groups received £ 20 to attend preand post-tests sessions in January and June 2005 • Intervention group also received £ 5 for each session attended between pre- and post-tests • Payments to learners after end of study
Results • One class did not meet inclusion criteria – excluded • 14 classes in each group • Tests marked by researcher at NFER • Data analysed by statistician in York blind to status of groups
Effects of incentives on sessions attended and post-test scores Variable Intervention (n = 82) Control (n = 70) Mean (SD) number of sessions attended (p = 0. 019) 5. 28 (2. 79) 6. 69 (2. 71) Mean (SD) post-test literacy scores (not significantly different from pre-test for either group) 19. 01 (8. 68) 21. 14 (8. 84)
Limitations • Small study • Small incentive • Incentives in form of vouchers – cash better? • Did not test policy of financial sanctions
Discussion Perverse result known variously as: • ‘Over-Justification Hypothesis’ • ‘Corruption Effect’ • ‘The Hidden Cost of Reward’ • ‘Cognitive Evaluation Theory’ • ‘Crowding-Out Effect’
External interventions crowd out intrinsic motivation if they are perceived as controlling. In that case, both selfdetermination and self-esteem suffer, and the individuals react by reducing their intrinsic motivation in the activity controlled. (Frey and Jegen, 2001, p. 594) • - with rider ‘for interesting tasks’ added on p. 598 • Plausible explanation?
- Rbd layout
- Randomized block design advantages
- Advantage of randomized controlled trial
- The first trial of a controlled experiment allows
- Dell partner incentives
- Office 365 incentives
- Csp indirect reseller incentives
- Incentives build robustness in bittorrent
- Cohen "torrent"
- Government incentives for entrepreneurship
- Pay for performance and financial incentives
- Microsoft partner incentives