Vouchers versus Lotteries: What Works Best in Promoting Chlamydia Screening? A Cluster Randomized Controlled Trial

Claudia Niza, Caroline Rudisill and Paul Dolan

Applied Economic Perspectives and Policy, 2014, vol. 36, issue 1, 109-124

Abstract: In this cluster randomized trial (N = 1060), we tested the impact of financial incentives (£5 voucher vs. £200 lottery) framed as a gain or loss to promote Chlamydia screening in students aged 18–24 years, mimicking the standard outreach approach to student in halls of residence. Compared to the control group (1.5%), the lottery increased screening to 2.8% and the voucher increased screening to 22.8%. Incentives framed as gains were marginally more effective (10.5%) than loss-framed incentives (7.1%). This work contributes to the literature by testing the predictive validity of Prospect Theory to change health behavior in the field.

Date: 2014
References: View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (2)

Downloads: (external link)
http://hdl.handle.net/10.1093/aepp/ppt033 (application/pdf)
Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:oup:apecpp:v:36:y:2014:i:1:p:109-124.

Ordering information: This journal article can be ordered from
https://academic.oup.com/journals

Access Statistics for this article

Applied Economic Perspectives and Policy is currently edited by Timothy Park, Tomislav Vukina and Ian Sheldon

More articles in Applied Economic Perspectives and Policy from Agricultural and Applied Economics Association Oxford University Press, Great Clarendon Street, Oxford OX2 6DP, UK. Contact information at EDIRC.
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Oxford University Press ().