Across different terms, introductory psychology college instructors offered incentives to students for participating in department-wide research as part of a course requirement. Students received either no incentive (n = 590) or exam “bonus points” (n = 480) on both a midterm and final exam. Students offered bonus points began work at an earlier date and completed the research requirement more frequently than students not offered bonus points. Use of the bonus-point system could benefit students, instructors, and researchers.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
EvansR.DonnersteinE. (1974). Some implications for psychological research of early versus late term participation by college subjects. Journal of Research in Personality, 8, 102–109.
2.
HolmesD. S. (1967). Amount of experience in experiments as a determinant of performance in later experiments. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 7, 403–407.
3.
HomH.L. (1987). A methodological note: Time of participation effects on intrinsic motivation. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 13, 210–215.
4.
LandrumR. E.ChastainG. (1995). Experiment spot-checks: A method for assessing the educational value of undergraduate participation in research. IRB: A Review of Human Subjects Research, 17, 4–6.
5.
MaslingJ.O'NeillR.JayneC. (1981). Orality and latency of volunteering to serve as experimental subjects. Journal of Personality Assessment, 45, 20–22.
6.
MaughanM. R.HigbeeK. L. (1981). Effects of subjects' incentives for participation on estimated compliance for self and others. Psychological Reports, 49, 119–122.
7.
MorelandR. L. (1999). Evaluating students' research experiences via credit slips. In ChastainG. D.LandrumR. E. (Eds.), Protecting human subjects: Departmental subject pools and institutional re-view boards (pp. 87–108). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
8.
RichterD. O.WilsonS. D.MilnerM.SenterR. J. (1981). Some differences among students volunteering as research subjects. Bulletin of the Psychonomic Society, 17, 261–263.
9.
RomanR. J.MoskowitzG. B.SteinM. I.EisenbergR. F. (1995). Individual differences in experimental participation: Structure, autonomy, and the time of the semester. Journal of Personality, 63, 113–138.
10.
RosenthalR.RosnowR. L. (1975). The volunteer subject. New York: Wiley.
11.
SieberJ. E.SaksM. J. (1989). A census of subject pool characteristics and policies. American Psychologist, 44, 1053–1061.
12.
WaiteB. M.BowmanL. L. (1999). Research participation among general psychology students at a metropolitan comprehensive public university. In ChastainG.LandrumR. E. (Eds.), Protecting human subjects: Departmental subject pools and institutional review boards (pp. 69–85). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
13.
ZelenskiJ. M.RustingC. L.LarsenR. J. (2000, February). Personality differences and consistency in the time of experiment participation.Poster session presented at the annual meeting of the Society for Personality and Social Psychology, Nashville, TN.
