Abstract
Purpose
Online labor pools continue to grow in popularity, serving as an inexpensive, readily available source of research data. Despite early skepticism, accounting research has generally found evidence that supports the use of these labor pools. However, one important distinction unique to online labor markets is the pre-screening process that qualifies participants for future studies. As the identity of online participants are generally unknown, researchers rely on participants’ self-reported identities to establish a pool of qualified respondents. This paper aims to provide evidence of the reliability of online participants’ answers to pre-screening questions.
Design/methodology/approach
Following the current literature’s recommendations on pre-screening candidates, I employ a multi-stage design using two similar surveys that are taken by each participant. I compare participants' answers on the first survey and the second survey to provide evidence on the consistency of their responses.
Findings
My results indicate that online participants are responding with substantial inconsistency to survey questions related to their social identity at a rate that may not be tolerable for many researchers. This has implications for researchers who use these online labor markets to represent a particular population of interest.
Originality/value
This study is the first to provide evidence on the consistency of online labor market participant responses. Additionally, it is the first to test the efficacy of current recommended guidelines for identifying populations of interest in the literature.
Reference23 articles.
1. Inclusion of other in the self scale and the structure of interpersonal closeness;Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,1992
2. Disclaiming the future: investigating the impact of cautionary disclaimers on investor judgments before and after experiencing economic loss;The Accounting Review,2018
3. Bentley, J.W. (2019), “Challenges with amazon mechanical turk research in accounting”, available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=2924876 (accessed 30 March 2018).
4. Crowdsourcing intelligent research participants: a student versus MTurk comparison;Behavioral Research in Accounting,2019
5. A technical guide to using amazon’s mechanical Turk in behavioral accounting research;Behavioral Research in Accounting,2017
Cited by
3 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献