Acquisition and retention · Two randomized field experiments and a supporting online experiment
Words Matter! Toward a Prosocial Call-to-Action for Online Referral: Evidence from Two Field Experiments
Jung, J., Bapna, R., Golden, J. M., & Sun, T. (2020). Information Systems Research, 31(1), 16–36.
Plain-English take
Prosocial framing raised both referral initiation and successful referrals compared with egoistic and equitable wording under a fixed incentive scheme. For your marketing: This is a direct test idea for referral prompts: explain how the product could help the recipient, then measure completed qualified referrals rather than clicks on the invite button.
How much weight to give this
4.5/5 Strong design for its specific question
The 1–5 evidence-check score is a practical reading aid, not a formal peer review or a probability that a conclusion is true. It combines design strength (2 points), sample reporting (1), comparison/control clarity (1), and how much of the paper could be checked (1). Access affects how confidently this directory can assess a study, not the study's underlying quality. Blinding is reported separately because it is not relevant to every design.
Random assignment provides a strong comparison for effects in the tested setting.
Large sample reported (100,000); size alone does not guarantee a representative sample.
Randomized comparison; confirm the control condition and analysis in the paper.
This profile could be checked against an abstract or metadata, not the full paper.
Double-blind? Blinding is not reported in the source reviewed; that does not establish whether blinding was or was not used.
Research question
What the authors investigated
Can referral-request wording raise referral participation while preserving the intrinsic motivation to help friends?
Design
Large-scale randomized field experiment with additional field and online experiments comparing prosocial, egoistic, and equitable referral calls to action.
Sample and setting
The main field experiment involved 100,000 customers; the publisher abstract also reports a second field experiment and a Mechanical Turk experiment.
Reported result
What the study found
Prosocial framing raised both referral initiation and successful referrals compared with egoistic and equitable wording under a fixed incentive scheme. Participants reported less guilt and were more selective about whom to refer.
This is a paraphrase of the source. Check the original paper for definitions, estimates, statistical uncertainty and analysis details.
Scope and transfer
Limitations to keep in view
The publisher abstract does not detail the commercial setting or full limitations. Referral behavior and recipient quality may differ across products and relationship types.
Possible founder application
A direct test idea for referral prompts: explain how the product could help the recipient, then measure completed qualified referrals rather than clicks on the invite button.
Evidence access
Publisher abstract; full text may require access
INFORMS publisher abstract retrieved with Firecrawl; reported sample and effects are summarized at abstract level.
If only an abstract or metadata was available, the profile is limited to claims supported there. A paper's paywall does not change its evidentiary status, but it limits what we can substantiate from accessible text.