Skip to main content
UTEP

Compensation Guidance

Research compensation is usually monetary but other rewards or gifts may be offered.

Payment for participation in research should be just and fair. The amount and schedule of all payments should be presented to the IRB at the time of initial review. The IRB reviews both the amount of payment and the proposed method and timing of disbursement to assure that neither are coercive or present undue influence.

Payment should not be contingent upon completion of the entire study. In cases where a participant is unable to complete, payment will be pro-rated based on the amount of participation.

Researchers may provide a monetary or gift incentive, such as a gift card or t-shirt, to thank participants for their time and effort. Payments may include reimbursement for costs for travel, babysitting, or other expenses resulting from or related to participation in the research.

Payment for participation in studies is not a research benefit.

Compensation Considerations

Researchers and the IRB must:

  • ensure participants are recruited fairly, informed adequately, and paid equitably (i.e., payment amount is commensurate with the time and effort required for participation)
  • ensure the rewards offered for participation in research do not cause undue enticement
  • ensure the amount paid as a bonus for completion is reasonable and not so large to coerce participants to stay in the study when they would have otherwise withdrawn

Payment that is excessive or inappropriate in relation to the research procedures is problematic. Individuals may participate against their better judgment. Individuals may be encouraged to lie or to withhold information to participate in the study when they do not meet the eligibility criteria. This impacts not only the integrity of the research and the validity of the data but can also compromise the safety of subjects. Inappropriate payment can also create coercive situations when given to third parties. Offers that are excessive or overly attractive may:

  • distort the perception of risks for participation in a study
  • impair a prospective participant's ability to exercise proper judgment
  • prompt prospective participants to lie or conceal information that, if known, would make them ineligible to enroll in the research

Assessing the appropriateness of an incentive or payment may require consideration of the prevailing payment practices within an institution or general locale, or among a particular research population. For example: A $100 incentive to physicians for a one-hour focus group during the work day may be considered an appropriate incentive. A $100 incentive to high school students to participate in the same focus group may not be appropriate.

Payment for participation in research that involves the assumption of risk or significant discomfort requires a thorough assessment. The following questions may be useful for researchers and the IRB to assess the appropriateness of payment for greater than minimal risk research:

  1. Are the conditions for research participation consistent with standards for voluntary and informed consent?
  2. Are the incentives/payments offered reasonable given the participant population and the complexities, inconveniences, and risks of the study?
  3. How likely is it the incentives/payments may induce an individual to participate when she/he/they might otherwise not volunteer?
  4. Are there special standards the IRB ought to apply to the review of research in which volunteers are asked to assume significant risk?
  5. Should the IRB monitor participant recruitment or consent to evaluate whether the incentives/payments may be a disproportionate inducement to prospective participants?

For studies involving multiple contacts or a lengthy time commitment, payment should accrue as the study progresses (as appropriate to the research). Participants who withdraw before completing the study would receive the amount earned according to time spent in the research. Completion of a research activity may not be a criterion for payment, except for small, non-coercive bonuses added as an incentive to accrued payments.

Researchers must describe the amount, distribution schedule and processes for incentives/payments in the appropriate researcher form at the time of initial review, or in a protocol amendment if an inventive/payment is being added to an approved study. This requirement applies to all review levels: exempt, expedited, and full committee.

Requirements for Informing Participants

Policy:

Participants must be accurately informed through the consent process about any payment/incentive for participation. If or when questions or complaints arise regarding payment, the consent form becomes the source document for the information that was provided to participants. The information about incentives/payment should be clear, detailed, and consistent with the protocol. The following information must be disclosed to prospective participants prior to enrollment:

  • amount of incentives or payments, including the approximate value of non-cash gifts
  • payment schedule
  • the odds of winning (if incentives/payments will be in the form of a drawing)
  • participant requirements to receive incentives/payments (including if receipts are required for reimbursable expenses)
  • conditions under which payment will be reduced (e.g., participant withdraws part way through the research)
  • institutional requirements for the researchers to report participant information to disburse payment.

Compensation Considerations

IRB Guidance on Compensation to Research Subjects:

Compensation to research participants is not a benefit. Truly, compensation is provided to make up for time or any inconvenience of participation, as well as to serve as a motivation to applicants. Federal regulations do not provide limits in participants’ compensation, but do indicate compensation needs to be equitable. It is the IRB Committee’s responsibility to ensure that research participants participate voluntarily and that informed consent is free from coercion.

Compensation that is excessive or unsuitable in relation to the research is problematic for many different reasons. Unnecessary and/or excessive compensation may encourage some individuals to lie or withhold information so they can participate when they do not meet the established criteria. This may skew the data and be reflected in the data integrity. Unsuitable compensation may also create conflict when given to third parties, such as children.

In the case of children, their parent/guardian should be able to make informed decisions about their child’s participation based on the true risks and benefits of the research, not on compensation.

 

Ethical Considerations

The Form and Amount of Compensation: 

Compensation may be given in monetary (cash, gifts cards, etc.) or non-monetary (extra credit, course credit, etc.). The protocol should clearly state the forms of compensation that will be provided to the participants in the study and the amount of compensation. For the non-monetary compensation, the approximate value should be provided.

Example:

Compensation may be provided in the form of a drawing.  When a drawing or lottery is being considered, researchers should confirm that there is a fair method for selecting winners and that the value of the prize divided by the number of subjects is reasonable in relation to the procedures involved. Participants should also be informed of the odds of winning, number of prizes, how winners are chosen and notified.

Compensation can also be awarded by completing various steps and/or tasks involved in the research.

Example:

Study warrants a screening process to determine eligibility. Each potential participant would need to answer a 10-15 minute survey and will be compensated $1.00 to complete the screening process. But if the participant would be deemed ineligible, the participant would be thanked for their time and paid. If the participant passed the screening criteria and completed the entire project, they would receive the full compensation.

For student participants, compensation can be provided in the form of extra credit and/or course credit. The study design and compensation should account for student participants in other disciplines/colleges that may participate in your research but their college/professor will not grant extra credit and/or course credit.

Example:

Extra credit and/or course credit must be reasonable and in accordance with the tasks and time involved in the project. If extra credit and/or course credit is provided to those students that participate in research, students who opt not to participate in research should be provided with alternate non-research options to receive extra credit and/or course credit.

 

Timing of Compensation:  

In addition to form and amount of compensation, the timing of payments should be established.  Making compensation contingent on completion may be appropriate if the procedures are short (such as a one-time survey). In other studies where tasks occur over time or through multiple interactions, compensation should not be restricted and/or contingent upon study completion.  This negates the ability of a participant to withdraw and may be viewed as coercive. Participants who are disqualified during the study or are unable to complete the research through no fault of their own should still receive compensation. It is recommended that if this should occur, compensation should be prorated. In this case, compensation should be proportional to their research participation (time and tasks completed). FDA regulated research requires prorated compensation.