Acquisition and retention · Two field experiments and one fully incentivized laboratory experiment
Why Prosocial Referral Incentives Work: The Interplay of Reputational Benefits and Action Costs
Gershon, R., Cryder, C., & John, L. K. (2020). Journal of Marketing Research, 57(1), 156–172.
Plain-English take
Across the experiments, recipient-benefiting prosocial referral incentives recruited more new customers than comparison incentives in the studied contexts. For your marketing: Test whether reducing the recipient's cost or increasing their benefit works better than paying the referrer alone.
How much weight to give this
3.5/5 Useful evidence with meaningful caveats
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.
An experiment is useful for causal evidence, but the accessible profile does not establish random assignment.
A usable sample size is not stated in the profile's accessible source.
Experimental comparison is described; randomization or control details need checking 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
When do referral incentives that benefit the recipient generate more referrals than incentives paid to the referrer?
Design
Two field experiments and a fully incentivized laboratory experiment compare prosocial, recipient-benefiting incentives with alternative reward structures and test reputational benefits and action costs.
Sample and setting
Participants in two referral-program field settings and an incentivized lab experiment; the publisher abstract reviewed does not give sample sizes.
Reported result
What the study found
Across the experiments, recipient-benefiting prosocial referral incentives recruited more new customers than comparison incentives in the studied contexts.
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
Reward effectiveness depends on the product, action cost and social meaning of the referral. Abstract-level results do not establish profitability after reward expense or generalize every program to a prosocial reward.
Possible founder application
Test whether reducing the recipient's cost or increasing their benefit works better than paying the referrer alone. Measure completed, retained customers and net contribution.
Evidence access
Publisher abstract; full text access may vary
Journal of Marketing Research abstract and bibliographic record; experiment count and headline comparison are reported in the abstract.
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.