The DOI matches its Crossref record; 31 of the 31 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Realistic precision and accuracy of online experiment platforms, web browsers, and devices
Open accessAbstract
Due to increasing ease of use and ability to quickly collect large samples, online behavioural research is currently booming. With this popularity, it is important that researchers are aware of who online participants are, and what devices and software they use to access experiments. While it is somewhat obvious that these factors can impact data quality, the magnitude of the problem remains unclear. To understand how these characteristics impact experiment presentation and data quality, we performed a battery of automated tests on a number of realistic set-ups. We investigated how different web-building platforms (Gorilla v.20190828, jsPsych v6.0.5, Lab.js v19.1.0, and psychoJS/PsychoPy3 v3.1.5), browsers (Chrome, Edge, Firefox, and Safari), and operating systems (macOS and Windows 10) impact display time across 30 different frame durations for each software combination. We then employed a robot actuator in realistic set-ups to measure response recording across the aforementioned platforms, and between different keyboard types (desktop and integrated laptop). Finally, we analysed data from over 200,000 participants on their demographics, technology, and software to provide context to our findings. We found that modern web platforms provide reasonable accuracy and precision for display duration and manual response time, and that no single platform stands out as the best in all features and conditions. In addition, our online participant analysis shows what equipment they are likely to use.
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
Power failure: why small sample size undermines the reliability of neuroscience
Button, K. S., Ioannidis, J. P. A., Mokrysz, C., Nosek, B. A., Flint, J., Robinson, E. S. J., & Munafò, M. R. (2013) · Nature Reviews Neuroscience · doi:10.1038/nrn3475 · Cited by 7,641
Prolific.ac—A subject pool for online experiments
Palan, S., & Schitter, C. (2018) · Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Finance · doi:10.1016/j.jbef.2017.12.004 · Cited by 3,450
Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance.
Intons-Peterson, M. J. (1981) · Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance · doi:10.1037/h0078016 · Cited by 3,183
OpenSesame: An open-source, graphical experiment builder for the social sciences
Mathôt, S., Schreij, D., & Theeuwes, J. (2012) · Behavior Research Methods · doi:10.3758/s13428-011-0168-7 · Cited by 2,586
Gorilla in our midst: An online behavioral experiment builder
Anwyl-Irvine, A. L., Massonnié, J., Flitton, A., Kirkham, N., & Evershed, J. K. (2020) · Behavior Research Methods · doi:10.3758/s13428-019-01237-x · Cited by 1,862
Self-citationjsPsych: A JavaScript library for creating behavioral experiments in a Web browser
de Leeuw, J. R. (2015) · Behavior Research Methods · doi:10.3758/s13428-014-0458-y · Cited by 1,778
The timing mega-study: comparing a range of experiment generators, both lab-based and online
Bridges, D., Pitiot, A., MacAskill, M. R., & Peirce, J. W. (2020) · PeerJ · doi:10.7717/peerj.9414 · Cited by 546
Psychological Experiments on the Internet
(2000) · Elsevier eBooks · doi:10.1016/b978-0-12-099980-4.x5000-x · Cited by 463
Size invariance in visual object priming.
Biederman, I., & Cooper, E. E. (1992) · Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance · doi:10.1037//0096-1523.18.1.121 · Cited by 363
Clifford, S., & Jerit, J. (2014) · Journal of Experimental Political Science · doi:10.1017/xps.2014.5 · Cited by 206
Cited by
Ward, D. F. B., & Lo, Y. Y. (2023) · System · doi:10.1016/j.system.2023.103094 · Cited by 4
Callen, M. C. (2025) · Bilingualism: Language and Cognition · doi:10.1017/s1366728924000555 · Cited by 4
Metadata
- Authors
- Anwyl-Irvine, A., Dalmaijer, E. S., Hodges, N., & Evershed, J. K.
- Venue
- Behavior Research Methods
- Published
- 2020-11-02
- Volume
- 53
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 1407-1425
- ISSN
- 1554-351X (ISSN-L)
- 1554-3528
- OpenAlex
- W3096032216
- Cited by
- 341
- References
- 31
- FWCI
- 40.50
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- hybrid
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: Realistic precision and accuracy of online experiment platforms, web browsers, and devices. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.3758/s13428-020-01501-5
- The paper
- Anwyl-Irvine, A., Dalmaijer, E. S., Hodges, N., & Evershed, J. K. (2021). Realistic precision and accuracy of online experiment platforms, web browsers, and devices. Behavior Research Methods. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13428-020-01501-5
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.