Suppose you are using a survey to measure voter preferences towards binary policy issues (e.g. whether to increase taxes, whether to legalise gay marriage, whether to start a war...)
The simplest approach, which I suspect is the dominant approach in political science, is simply to ask voters what they want. For example: "Do you want to legalise gay marriage?" This approach makes a lot of sense to me.
In economics, however, there has been a long standing view that one needs to 'incentivise' accurate answers. This is not easy to do in the context of voter preferences. However, there are recent papers that try to do something along these lines. For example, to measure voter attitudes towards gay marriage, you can check if they want to donate some money that you have just given them to an organisation that lobbies for (or against) gay marriage.
Q: Are there methodological papers on the benefits/costs of such incentivisation? Are there methodological papers on the benefits/costs of such incentivisation? (Note: I am asking specifically about the case of voter preferences; methodological papers on incentivisation in general abound.) One question that is especially relevant, although perhaps hard to study, is whether incentivised measures predict actual voting behaviour better or worse than simple unincentivised measures.
