ArticleBehavior research methods2024
Do mturkers collude in interactive online experiments?
Article in Behavior research methods, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
One of the issues that can potentially affect the internal validity of interactive online experiments that recruit participants using crowdsourcing platforms is collusion: participants could act upon information shared through channels that are external to the experimental design. Using two experiments, I measure how prevalent collusion is among MTurk workers and whether collusion depends on experimental design choices. Despite having incentives to collude, I find no evidence that MTurk workers collude in the treatments that resembled the design of most other interactive online experiments. This suggests collusion is not a concern for data quality in typical interactive online experiments that recruit participants using crowdsourcing platforms. However, I find that approximately 3% of MTurk workers collude when the payoff of collusion is unusually high. Therefore, collusion should not be overlooked as a possible danger to data validity in interactive experiments that recruit participants using crowdsourcing platforms when participants have strong incentives to engage in such behavior.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.