The DOI matches its Crossref record; 86 of the 86 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
MTurk Research: Review and Recommendations
Open accessAbstract
The use of Amazon’s Mechanical Turk (MTurk) in management research has increased over 2,117% in recent years, from 6 papers in 2012 to 133 in 2019. Among scholars, though, there is a mixture of excitement about the practical and logistical benefits of using MTurk and skepticism about the validity of the data. Given that the practice is rapidly increasing but scholarly opinions diverge, the Journal of Management commissioned this review and consideration of best practices. We hope the recommendations provided here will serve as a catalyst for more robust, reproducible, and trustworthy MTurk-based research in management and related fields.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Evaluating Online Labor Markets for Experimental Research: Amazon.com's Mechanical Turk
Berinsky, A. J., Huber, G. A., & Lenz, G. S. (2012) · Political Analysis · doi:10.1093/pan/mpr057 · Cited by 4,008
Running experiments on Amazon Mechanical Turk
Paolacci, G., Chandler, J., & Ipeirotis, P. G. (2010) · Judgment and Decision Making · doi:10.1017/s1930297500002205 · Cited by 3,767
Conducting behavioral research on Amazon’s Mechanical Turk
Mason, W., & Suri, S. (2012) · Behavior Research Methods · doi:10.3758/s13428-011-0124-6 · Cited by 3,172
Data collection in a flat world: the strengths and weaknesses of Mechanical Turk samples
Goodman, J. K., Cryder, C. E., & Cheema, A. (2013) · Journal of Behavioral Decision Making · doi:10.1002/bdm.1753 · Cited by 2,242
Synthesizing information systems knowledge: A typology of literature reviews
Paré, G., Trudel, M.-C., Jaana, M., & Kitsiou, S. (2015) · Information & Management · doi:10.1016/j.im.2014.08.008 · Cited by 1,987
A Critical Review and Best‐Practice Recommendations for Control Variable Usage
Bernerth, J. B., & Aguinis, H. (2016) · Personnel Psychology · doi:10.1111/peps.12103 · Cited by 1,731 · cited 1×
“Therefore, when Big Five traits are expected to influence substantive results, they can be used as statistical controls so that results and inferences are attributable to the hypothesized predictors and not to variability in personality traits between samples (Bernerth & Aguinis, 2016).”
BackgroundSelf-citationCasler, K., Bickel, L., & Hackett, E. (2013) · Computers in Human Behavior · doi:10.1016/j.chb.2013.05.009 · Cited by 1,662
Reputation as a sufficient condition for data quality on Amazon Mechanical Turk
Peer, E., Vosgerau, J., & Acquisti, A. (2014) · Behavior Research Methods · doi:10.3758/s13428-013-0434-y · Cited by 1,618 · cited 1×
“…familiarity with common manipulations, attention check techniques, and experimental tasks and questions; Lovett, Bajaba, Lovett, & Simmering, 2018; Peer, Vosgerau, & Acquisti, 2014) or, alternatively, employ screening questions to gauge MTurker familiarity with research subject, stimuli, and if…”
BackgroundEvaluating amazon’s mechanical turk as a tool for experimental behavioral research
Crump, M. J. C., McDonnell, J. V., & Gureckis, T. M. (2013) · PLoS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0057410 · Cited by 1,617
CAPTCHA: Using Hard AI Problems for Security
von Ahn, L., Blum, M., Hopper, N. J., & Langford, J. (2003) · Lecture Notes in Computer Science · doi:10.1007/3-540-39200-9_18 · Cited by 1,447
Research works printed but not linked: 2
- Bederson B. B., 2011, ACM CHI Extended Abstracts on Human Factors in Computing Systems, 2011, 97
- Dennis S. A., Goodson B. M., Pearson C. 2019. Virtual private servers and the limitations of IP-based screening procedures: Lessons from the MTurk quality crisis of 2018 (Publication No. 3233954). SSRN.
Cited by
Douglas, B. D., Ewell, P. J., & Brauer, M. (2023) · PLOS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0279720 · Cited by 1,532
Survey response rates: Trends and a validity assessment framework
Holtom, B., Baruch, Y., Aguinis, H., & A Ballinger, G. (2022) · Human Relations · doi:10.1177/00187267211070769 · Cited by 380
Self-citationDo Investors Care about Impact?
Heeb, F., Kölbel, J. F., Paetzold, F., & Zeisberger, S. (2023) · The Review of Financial Studies · doi:10.1093/rfs/hhac066 · Cited by 332
Attitude Toward the Color Blue: An Ideal Marker Variable
Miller, B. K., & Simmering, M. J. (2023) · Organizational Research Methods · doi:10.1177/10944281221075361 · Cited by 298
Consumer Responses to AI-Generated Charitable Giving Ads
Arango, L., Singaraju, S. P., & Niininen, O. (2023) · Journal of Advertising · doi:10.1080/00913367.2023.2183285 · Cited by 243
Metadata
- Authors
- Aguinis, H., Villamor, I., & Ramani, R. S.
- Venue
- Journal of Management
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications
- Published
- 2020-11-19
- Volume
- 47
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 823-837
- ISSN
- 0149-2063 (ISSN-L)
- 1557-1211
- OpenAlex
- W3108819963
- Cited by
- 984
- References
- 86
- FWCI
- 103.08
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
- Licence
- journals.sagepub.com/page/policies/text-and-data-mining-license (tdm)
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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: MTurk Research: Review and Recommendations. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1177/0149206320969787
- The paper
- Aguinis, H., Villamor, I., & Ramani, R. S. (2021). MTurk Research: Review and Recommendations. Journal of Management. https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206320969787
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
