Incentivizing P/CVE Research, Evaluation, & Program Participants



Preventing Violent Extremism, PVE, Countering Violent Extremism, CVE, P/CVE, Design, Evaluation, Incentives, Incentivizing


Incentivizing research or evaluation participants can be crucial toward reducing data collection timeframes and obtaining sufficient sample sizes (i.e., to reduce the risks of obtaining null or misleading findings).  Consequently, participant incentives should not be underestimated with respect to their importance both for obtaining quality P/CVE research or evaluation data, and for improving subsequent managerial/programmatic decision-making: no small matter given the high-stakes fields of P/CVE.  This research methods brief discusses participant incentives (including potential pitfalls and means to avoid them), in the context of P/CVE program design and evaluation, including: their relevance to statistical power and reducing sample bias, budgeting for incentives, alternatives to monetary incentives, and considerations for planning to upscale a given P/CVE program.


Berlin, M., Mohadjer, L., Waksberg, J., Kolstad, A., Kirsch, I., Rock, D., & Yamamoto, K. (1992). An experiment in monetary incentives. Proceedings of Survey Research Methods Section of the American Statistical Association, 393–398.

Boucek, C. (2009). Extremist re-education and rehabilitation in Saudi Arabia. In T. Bjorjo & J. Horgan (Eds.), Leaving trrorism behind: Individual and collective disengagement (pp. 212–223). Routledge.

Burke, B. L., Martens, A., & Faucher, E. H. (2010). Two decades of terror management theory: A meta-analysis of mortality salience research. Personality and Social Psychology Revieww, 14(2), 155–195.

Cook, C., Heath, F., & Thompson, R. L. (2000). A meta-analysis of response rates in Web- or internet-based surveys. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 60(6), 821–836.

Dillman, D. A., Smyth, J. D., & Christian, L. M. (2014). Internet, phone, mail, and mixed mode surveys: The tailored design method, 4th ed. In Internet, phone, mail, and mixed mode surveys: The tailored design method, 4th ed.

DuBois, D. L., & Alem, F. (2017). Mentoring and domestic radicalization.

Groves, R. M., Fowler Jr, F. J., Couper, M. P., Lepkowski, J. M., Singer, E., & Tourangeau, R. (2009). Survey methodology. John Wiley & Sons.

Groves, R. M., Singer, E., & Corning, A. (2000). Leverage-saliency theory of survey participation: Description and an illustration. The Public Opinion Quarterly, 64(3), 299–308.

Health and Human Services. (2018). Federal policy for the protection of human subjects (“Common rule”).

Heberlein, T. A., & Baumgartner, R. (1978). Factors affecting response rates to mailed questionnaires: A quantitative analysis of the published literature. American Sociological Review, 43(4), 447–462.

Kruglanski, A. W., Gelfand, M. J., Bélanger, J. J., Hetiarachchi, M., & Gunaratna, R. (2015). Significance Quest Theory as the Driver of Radicalization towards Terrorism. April 2016, 17–30.

Marrone, J. V, Helmus, T. C., Bodine-Baron, E., & Santucci, C. (2020). Countering violent extremism in Nigeria: Using a text-message survey to assess radio programs. Rand Corp.

Picciolini, C. (2017). White American youth: My descent into America’s most violent hate movement--and how I got out. Hachette UK.

Singer, E., & Kulka, R. A. (2002). Paying respondents for survey participation. In M. Ver Ploeg, R. A. Moffitt, & C. F. Citro (Eds.), Studies of welfare populations: Data collection and research issues (pp. 105–128). National Academy Press.

Williams, M. J., Bélanger, J., Horgan, J., & Evans, W. (2018). Experimental effects of a call-center disclaimer regarding confidentiality on callers’ willingness to make disclosures related to terrorism. Terrorism and Political Violence.

Williams, M. J., Horgan, J. G., & Evans, W. P. (2016). Evaluation of a multi-faceted, U.S. community-based, Muslim-led CVE program.






Research Methods