EXPRESS: Response Satisficing across Online Data Sources: Effects of Satisficing on Data Quality and Policy-Relevant Results

IF 5.1 3区 管理学 Q1 BUSINESS
Christopher Berry, Scot Burton
{"title":"EXPRESS: Response Satisficing across Online Data Sources: Effects of Satisficing on Data Quality and Policy-Relevant Results","authors":"Christopher Berry, Scot Burton","doi":"10.1177/07439156241268707","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The use of crowdsourced data has become extremely popular in marketing and public policy research. However, there are concerns about the validity of studies that source data from crowdsourcing platforms such as Amazon’s Mechanical Turk (MTurk). Using five different online sample sources, including multiple MTurk samples and professionally managed panels, we address issues related to online data quality and its effects on results for a policy-based 2 x 2 between subjects’ experiment. We show that survey response satisficing, as well as multitasking, is related to attention check performance measures beyond demographic differences, and there are substantial differences across the five different online data sources. We specifically identify segments of high and low response satisficers using a multiitem measure and show that there are critical differences in the policy-relevant results for the experiment for these segments of online respondents. Findings suggest implications for concerns about failures to replicate results in the policy and consumer well-being, business, and social science literatures. We offer some suggestions for attempting to reduce problematic effects of response satisficing and data quality that are shown to differ substantially across the sample sources examined.","PeriodicalId":51437,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Public Policy & Marketing","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":5.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Public Policy & Marketing","FirstCategoryId":"91","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/07439156241268707","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"BUSINESS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The use of crowdsourced data has become extremely popular in marketing and public policy research. However, there are concerns about the validity of studies that source data from crowdsourcing platforms such as Amazon’s Mechanical Turk (MTurk). Using five different online sample sources, including multiple MTurk samples and professionally managed panels, we address issues related to online data quality and its effects on results for a policy-based 2 x 2 between subjects’ experiment. We show that survey response satisficing, as well as multitasking, is related to attention check performance measures beyond demographic differences, and there are substantial differences across the five different online data sources. We specifically identify segments of high and low response satisficers using a multiitem measure and show that there are critical differences in the policy-relevant results for the experiment for these segments of online respondents. Findings suggest implications for concerns about failures to replicate results in the policy and consumer well-being, business, and social science literatures. We offer some suggestions for attempting to reduce problematic effects of response satisficing and data quality that are shown to differ substantially across the sample sources examined.
EXPRESS:在线数据源的满意度回复:满意度对数据质量和政策相关结果的影响
在市场营销和公共政策研究中,众包数据的使用已变得极为流行。然而,从亚马逊的 Mechanical Turk (MTurk) 等众包平台获取数据的研究的有效性令人担忧。我们利用五个不同的在线样本来源(包括多个 MTurk 样本和专业管理的面板),解决了与在线数据质量有关的问题及其对基于政策的 2 x 2 主体间实验结果的影响。我们的研究表明,调查回复满意度以及多任务处理与注意力检查绩效指标的关系超出了人口统计学差异,而且这五种不同的在线数据源之间存在很大差异。我们使用多项目测量法具体确定了高满意度和低满意度的回答者群体,并表明这些群体的在线回答者在实验的政策相关结果方面存在重大差异。研究结果表明,在政策、消费者福利、商业和社会科学文献中,对结果复制失败的担忧是有意义的。我们还提出了一些建议,以试图减少答复满意度和数据质量的问题影响,这些影响在所研究的样本来源中存在很大差异。
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
CiteScore
10.20
自引率
15.40%
发文量
29
期刊介绍: Journal of Public Policy & Marketing welcomes manuscripts from diverse disciplines to offer a range of perspectives. We encourage submissions from individuals with varied backgrounds, such as marketing, communications, economics, consumer affairs, law, public policy, sociology, psychology, anthropology, or philosophy. The journal prioritizes well-documented, well-reasoned, balanced, and relevant manuscripts, regardless of the author's field of expertise.
×
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信