The DOI matches its Crossref record; 18 of the 20 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Inattentive Responding in MTurk and Other Online Samples
Abstract
The focal article by Landers and Behrend (2015) makes the case that samples collected on microtask websites like Amazon's Mechanical Turk (MTurk) are inherently no better or worse than traditional samples of convenience from university students or organizations. We wholeheartedly agree. However, having successfully used MTurk and other online sources for data collection, we feel that the focal article was insufficient regarding the caution required in identifying inattentive respondents and the problems that can arise if such individuals are not removed from the dataset. Although we focus on MTurk, similar issues arise for most “low-stakes” assessments, including student samples, which seem to be increasingly collected online.
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
In the citing paper
“Previous research also demonstrates that MTurk data is as reliable as other common convenience samples (i.e., college student samples) (Fleischer et al., 2015).”
From Virtual reality adoption during the COVID-19 pandemic: A uses and gratifications perspective (2021) · cites this paper as Fleischer et al., 2015
Citations
Cites
Egeth, H. E., & Kahneman, D. J. (1975) · The American Journal of Psychology · doi:10.2307/1421603 · Cited by 6,976
Identifying careless responses in survey data.
Meade, A. W., & Craig, S. B. (2012) · Psychological Methods · doi:10.1037/a0028085 · Cited by 3,865
Wright, K. B. (2006) · Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication · doi:10.1111/j.1083-6101.2005.tb00259.x · Cited by 2,550
Introduction to Measurement Theory
Allen, M. J. (1979) · Cited by 2,124
Detecting and Deterring Insufficient Effort Responding to Surveys
Huang, J. L. W., Curran, P. G., Keeney, J., Poposki, E. M., & DeShon, R. P. (2011) · Journal of Business and Psychology · doi:10.1007/s10869-011-9231-8 · Cited by 1,315
Landers, R. N., & Behrend, T. S. (2015) · Industrial and Organizational Psychology · doi:10.1017/iop.2015.13 · Cited by 714
Factors Defined by Negatively Keyed Items: The Result of Careless Respondents?
Schmitt, N., & Stuits, D. M. (1985) · Applied Psychological Measurement · doi:10.1177/014662168500900405 · Cited by 536
Careless Responding to Reverse-Worded Items: Implications for Confirmatory Factor Analysis
Woods, C. M. (2006) · Journal of Psychopathology and Behavioral Assessment · doi:10.1007/s10862-005-9004-7 · Cited by 402
Evidence for response bias as a source of error variance in applied assessment.
McGrath, R. E., Mitchell, M., Kim, B. H., & Hough, L. (2010) · Psychological Bulletin · doi:10.1037/a0019216 · Cited by 282
MMPI-2 random responding indices: Validation using a self-report methodology.
Berry, D. T. R., Wetter, M. W., Baer, R. A., Larsen, L. H., Clark, C. D., & Monroe, K. (1992) · Psychological Assessment · doi:10.1037/1040-3590.4.3.340 · Cited by 177
Research works printed but not linked: 2
- Huang, 2015, Does the negatively-worded item effect exist in personality measures? A meta-analysis
- Fleischer, 2015, Detecting inattentive pilot test examinees in an MTurk sample
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Items 101–151 of 151
Further validation of the Digital Communication Empathy Scale (DCES)
Collins, A. M., Warburton, W., Sweller, N., & Bussey, K. (2025) · Computers in Human Behavior Reports · doi:10.1016/j.chbr.2025.100721 · Cited by 4
Development of the Gay Male Heterophobia Scale.
Provence, M. M., Parent, M. C., Rochlen, A. B., & Chester, M. R. (2018) · Psychology of Men & Masculinity · doi:10.1037/men0000158 · Cited by 4
Robot Comedy (is) Special: A Surprising Lack of Bias for Gendered Robotic Comedians
Raghunath, N., Sanchez, C. A., & Fitter, N. T. (2022) · Lecture notes in computer science · doi:10.1007/978-3-031-24670-8_58 · Cited by 4
Empirical Methods in the Social Science for Researching Socially Interactive Agents
Pütten, A. M. R.-V. D., & Abrams, A. M. H. (2021) · ACM eBooks · doi:10.1145/3477322.3477325 · Cited by 4
Kölle, M., Walter, V., & Sörgel, U. (2024) · PFG – Journal of Photogrammetry Remote Sensing and Geoinformation Science · doi:10.1007/s41064-024-00281-3 · Cited by 6
Fear of Failure as Motivation: A Novel Conceptualization and Measure
Boileau, L., Gaudreau, P., & Pétrin‐Pomerleau, P. (2025) · Journal of Personality Assessment · doi:10.1080/00223891.2025.2555358 · Cited by 3
Jia, R., Reich, B. H., & Jia, H. H. (2016) · The Journal of Strategic Information Systems · doi:10.1016/j.jsis.2016.06.001 · Cited by 3
Zimmermann, M., Chong, A. K., Vechiu, C., & Papa, A. (2020) · Mental Health & Prevention · doi:10.1016/j.mhp.2020.200188 · Cited by 3
A multi-method approach to the detection of fabricated symptoms
Boskovic (2019) · Research Publications (Maastricht University) · doi:10.26481/dis.20190129ib · Cited by 4
Jonell, P., Kucherenko, T., Torre, I., & Beskow, J. (2020) · arXiv (Cornell University) · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2009.10760 · Cited by 3
Liu, I., Zhong, Q., Liu, F., Xu, H., Chen, W., Zhu, X., Ma, Y., & Ni, S. (2022) · International Symposium of Chinese CHI (Chinese CHI) · doi:10.1145/3565698.3565795 · Cited by 3
Liu, I., Li, S., Ma, D., Luan, J., Wu, X., Liu, F., Shen, Y., & Ni, S. (2024) · IEEE International Conference on Human-Machine Systems (ICHMS) · doi:10.1109/ichms59971.2024.10555674 · Cited by 2
Nieberle, K. W., Schyns, B., Kuonath, A., & Frey, D. (2024) · European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology · doi:10.1080/1359432x.2024.2392901 · Cited by 4
Stereotype content of players of violent and non‐violent games
Miriyagalla, U. P., Kashima, E. S., & Stukas, A. A. (2022) · Asian Journal Of Social Psychology · doi:10.1111/ajsp.12558 · Cited by 2
Machado, G. M., Perkins, E. R., Gerodo, T. P., de Miranda, J. V. M., Sica, C., Patrick, C. J., & Carvalho, L. D. F. (2023) · The Journal of Behavioral Health Services & Research · doi:10.1007/s11414-023-09858-z · Cited by 2
Jones, D. N., Taylor, T. D. A., & Hanna, A. (2023) · Personality and Individual Differences · doi:10.1016/j.paid.2023.112450 · Cited by 2
Conducting Survey Research Using MTurk
Chambers, S., & Nimon, K. (2019) · IGI Global eBooks · doi:10.4018/978-1-5225-8362-2.ch022 · Cited by 2
Conducting Survey Research Using MTurk
Chambers, S., & Nimon, K. (2019) · IGI Global eBooks · doi:10.4018/978-1-5225-8182-6.ch033 · Cited by 2
Verigin, B. L. (2020) · doi:10.26481/dis.20200622bv · Cited by 2
Milczarski, W., Borkowska, A., Paruzel‐Czachura, M., & Białek, M. (2022) · PsyArXiv (OSF Preprints) · doi:10.31234/osf.io/wbjyc · Cited by 2
Sevi, B., & Shook, N. J. (2024) · Current Psychology · doi:10.1007/s12144-024-07139-2 · Cited by 1
Li, H., Luo, J., Zhong, Q., Duan, Y., & Liu, I. (2025) · IEEE International Conference on Human-Machine Systems (ICHMS) · doi:10.1109/ichms65439.2025.11154192 · Cited by 1
Interacting with Sensor Data to Understand Uncertainty in Air Quality Monitoring
Pondaven, E., Liu, Z., Eri Saikawa, B., Jacques, J. T., & Williams, K. (2025) · International Conference on ICT for Sustainability (ICT4S) · doi:10.1109/ict4s68164.2025.00029 · Cited by 1
George, S. S., & Arhin, E. O. (2026) · Behavioral Sciences & the Law · doi:10.1002/bsl.70039 · Cited by 1
Prisco, D. D., & Russo, S. D. (2026) · Technological Forecasting and Social Change · doi:10.1016/j.techfore.2025.124491 · Cited by 1
Who’s Evaluating Whom? The Public Evaluation of Public and Private Leaders’ Unethical Behaviors
Jung, J. (2020) · Cited by 1
Karadağ, E. (2021) · Journal of Higher Education and Science · doi:10.5961/jhes.2021.455 · Cited by 1
Koscinski, B., & Allan, N. P. (2022) · Psychopathology · doi:10.1159/000527300 · Cited by 1
Validating the Revised Mating Effort Questionnaire
Albert, G. O., Davis, A. C., Bird, B. M., Arnocky, S. A., Hlay, J. K., Mcgee, N. D., Richardson, G. B., & Hodges‐Simeon, C. R. (2024) · Archives of Sexual Behavior · doi:10.1007/s10508-023-02793-2 · Cited by 1
How learning and legitimacy goals influence inter-firm imitation in R&D investment decisions
Mazzelli, A., & Foss, N. J. (2025) · BRQ Business Research Quarterly · doi:10.1177/23409444251320401 · Cited by 1
Recognition of a Robot’s Affective Expressions Under Conditions with Limited Visibility
Ghafurian, M., Akgun, S. A., Crowley, M., & Dautenhahn, K. (2021) · Lecture notes in computer science · doi:10.1007/978-3-030-85613-7_31 · Cited by 1
Developing an Automation Locus of Control Scale
Edwards, M. (2019) · Cited by 1
Mitchell, R. (2020) · Queensland University of Technology · doi:10.5204/thesis.eprints.201658
Good for the Many or Best for the Few? A Dilemma in the Design of Algorithmic AdvicePreprint
Dove, G., Balestra, M., Mann, D., & Nov, O. (2020) · arXiv (Cornell University) · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2008.12147
(2019) · International Journal of Market Research · doi:10.1177/1470785319870622
A Primer for Conducting Survey Research Using MTurk
Chambers, S., Nimon, K., & Anthony-McMann, P. E. (2019) · IGI Global eBooks · doi:10.4018/978-1-5225-8362-2.ch038
Milczarski, W., Borkowska, A., Paruzel‐Czachura, M., & Białek, M. (2022) · doi:10.31219/osf.io/n3pca
Llanos-Herrera, G. R. (2024) · Kybernetes · doi:10.1108/k-12-2023-2622
Zheng, M., Miroshnik, K. G., & Kaufman, J. C. (2025) · The Journal of Creative Behavior · doi:10.1002/jocb.70050
Detecting Nurse Burnout with Multi-Modal Large Language Models: A Feasibility Study
Luo, J., Duan, Y., Li, H., & Liu, I. (2025) · IEEE International Conference on Human-Machine Systems (ICHMS) · doi:10.1109/ichms65439.2025.11154274
Sjöberg, M. P., Taylor, P. J., & Conchie, S. M. (2025) · European Journal of Social Psychology · doi:10.1002/ejsp.70039
Jung, H., Kim, H., & Bae, J. (2026) · Electronic Commerce Research · doi:10.1007/s10660-026-10145-0
Shangguan, R., Xie, J., & Hamilton, X. D. (2026) · Frontiers in Public Health · doi:10.3389/fpubh.2026.1856461
Cummings, K. H., & Yule, J. A. (2026) · Journal of Business Research · doi:10.1016/j.jbusres.2026.116472
Fabricius, A., Yen, J., O’Doherty, K. C., & Goldenberg, M. J. (2026) · Perspectives on Psychological Science · doi:10.1177/17456916261471511
Development and validation of a sociocultural influences on diet questionnaire
Oslund, J. L., Chui, K., Dao, M. C., Das, S. K., Messer, E., Taylor, S. F., & Roberts, S. B. (2026) · American Journal of Clinical Nutrition · doi:10.1016/j.ajcnut.2026.101549
The Future of Entrepreneurship Research Includes Online Panel Data—If Used Correctly
Pollack, J. M., Gish, J. J., Michaelis, T. L., Burnette, J. L., Scheaf, D. J., Carr, J. C., & Smith, N. A. (2026) · Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice · doi:10.1177/10422587261496321
Metadata
- Authors
- Fleischer, A., Mead, A. D., & Huang, J.
- Affiliations
- Illinois Institute of Technology (US)
- Corresponding author
- Fleischer, Avi
- ORCID
- Huang, Jialin
- Venue
- Industrial and Organizational Psychology
- Publisher
- Cambridge University Press (CUP)
- Published
- 2015-06
- Volume
- 8
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 196-202
- ISSN
- 1754-9426 (ISSN-L)
- 1754-9434
- OpenAlex
- W2199108421
- Cited by
- 151
- References
- 20
- Citations by year
- 2026: 8 · 2025: 9 · 2024: 10 · 2023: 13 · 2022: 22 · 2021: 19 · 2020: 25 · 2019: 23 · 2018: 13 · 2017: 6 · 2016: 3
- FWCI
- 11.00
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Industrial and Organizational Psychology (publishedVersion)
- RePEc: Research Papers in Economics (submittedVersion)
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Science Applications › Mobile Crowdsensing and Crowdsourcing
- Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Survey Methodology and Nonresponse
- Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Management Science and Operations Research › Psychometric Methodologies and Testing
- Keywords
- Amazon Mechanical Turk, online sample, sample quality, convenience samples, low-stakes assessment, student samples, data cleaning, response validity
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review