Mechanical Turk Versus Student Samples: Comparisons and Recommendations

Stephen A. De Lurgio II, Amber Young, Zachary R. Steelman
{"title":"Mechanical Turk Versus Student Samples: Comparisons and Recommendations","authors":"Stephen A. De Lurgio II, Amber Young, Zachary R. Steelman","doi":"10.17705/1atrr.00082","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Mechanical Turk and other online crowdsourcing markets (OCMs) have become a go-to data source across scientific disciplines. In 2014 Steelman and colleagues investigated how Mechanical Turk data compared with student samples and consumer panels. They found the data to be comparable and reliable for academic research. In the nearly 10 years since its publication, the use of Mechanical Turk in research has grown substantially. To understand whether their results still hold, we conducted a partial replication to determine how Mechanical Turk workers continue to compare with students using UTAUT 2 as our theoretical model and virtual-reality headsets as the focal IT artifact. Our findings generally align with Steelman et al. (2014) and confirm that Mechanical Turk continues to offer a suitable alternative to student samples. This study reveals consistent results between the student and OCM samples, indicating the potential for interchangeability. The OCM samples are primarily male, while the student sample is majority female, following current US academic trends. All samples are significantly different in age, and only the US OCM and non-US OCM samples are similar in education. The path coefficients from the non-US OCM sample differ significantly from those from other OCM samples; the path coefficients derived from the student sample do not differ significantly from any OCM sample. While sample differences exist, as expected, many are addressable post hoc if anticipated and designed for during data collection. From our findings and the extant literature, we summarize recommendations for researchers and review teams.","PeriodicalId":193731,"journal":{"name":"AIS Transactions on Replication Research","volume":"60 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-12-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"AIS Transactions on Replication Research","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.17705/1atrr.00082","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Mechanical Turk and other online crowdsourcing markets (OCMs) have become a go-to data source across scientific disciplines. In 2014 Steelman and colleagues investigated how Mechanical Turk data compared with student samples and consumer panels. They found the data to be comparable and reliable for academic research. In the nearly 10 years since its publication, the use of Mechanical Turk in research has grown substantially. To understand whether their results still hold, we conducted a partial replication to determine how Mechanical Turk workers continue to compare with students using UTAUT 2 as our theoretical model and virtual-reality headsets as the focal IT artifact. Our findings generally align with Steelman et al. (2014) and confirm that Mechanical Turk continues to offer a suitable alternative to student samples. This study reveals consistent results between the student and OCM samples, indicating the potential for interchangeability. The OCM samples are primarily male, while the student sample is majority female, following current US academic trends. All samples are significantly different in age, and only the US OCM and non-US OCM samples are similar in education. The path coefficients from the non-US OCM sample differ significantly from those from other OCM samples; the path coefficients derived from the student sample do not differ significantly from any OCM sample. While sample differences exist, as expected, many are addressable post hoc if anticipated and designed for during data collection. From our findings and the extant literature, we summarize recommendations for researchers and review teams.
Mechanical Turk 与学生样本:比较与建议
Mechanical Turk和其他在线众包市场(OCM)已成为各科学学科的首选数据源。2014 年,Steelman 及其同事研究了 Mechanical Turk 数据与学生样本和消费者面板的比较。他们发现,对于学术研究而言,这些数据具有可比性和可靠性。自研究报告发表以来的近 10 年间,Mechanical Turk 在研究中的使用大幅增加。为了了解他们的研究结果是否仍然有效,我们进行了部分复制,以确定使用UTAUT 2 作为我们的理论模型和虚拟现实头盔作为重点 IT 工具,Mechanical Turk 工作人员与学生的比较情况。我们的研究结果与 Steelman 等人(2014 年)的研究结果基本一致,并证实 Mechanical Turk 仍然是学生样本的合适替代品。本研究揭示了学生样本和 OCM 样本之间的一致结果,表明两者之间有互换的可能性。OCM 样本以男性为主,而学生样本则以女性为主,这符合当前美国的学术趋势。所有样本在年龄上都有明显差异,只有美国 OCM 样本和非美国 OCM 样本在教育程度上相似。非美国 OCM 样本的路径系数与其他 OCM 样本的路径系数存在显著差异;学生样本的路径系数与任何 OCM 样本的路径系数均无显著差异。虽然如预期的那样存在样本差异,但如果在数据收集过程中进行预期和设计,许多差异是可以事后解决的。根据我们的研究结果和现有文献,我们总结了对研究人员和审查团队的建议。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信