ArticleBehavior research methods2025
Why you shouldn't trust data collected on MTurk.
Article in Behavior research methods, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Understanding when mixture models effectively identify careless responding: Simulation and validity evidence.Behavior research methods · 2026Article
- The Effects of Occupational Stress and Stress Management on the Performance of Frontline Healthcare Service Workers.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Comparing age differences in cognition, personality, and political orientation across six online recruitment platforms.Behavior research methods · 2026Article
- Partisan differences in healthcare decision-making: Evidence from a vaccine experiment.PloS one · 2026Article
- Generative AI in healthcare: challenges to patient agency and ethical implications.Frontiers in digital health · 2025Article
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
Several prior studies have used advanced methodological techniques to demonstrate that there is an issue with the quality of data that can be collected on Amazon's Mechanical Turk (MTurk). The goal of the present project was to provide an accessible demonstration of this issue. We administered 27 semantic antonyms-pairs of items that assess clearly contradictory content (e.g., "I talk a lot" and "I rarely talk")-to samples drawn from Connect (N
Indexed as
Identifiers
41214376What 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.