Bitte verwenden Sie diesen Link, um diese Publikation zu zitieren, oder auf sie als Internetquelle zu verweisen: https://hdl.handle.net/10419/263216 
Erscheinungsjahr: 
2022
Schriftenreihe/Nr.: 
GLO Discussion Paper No. 1157
Verlag: 
Global Labor Organization (GLO), Essen
Zusammenfassung: 
Amazon's Mechanical Turk is a very widely-used tool in business and economics research, but how trustworthy are results from well-published studies that use it? Analyzing the universe of hypotheses tested on the platform and published in leading journals between 2010 and 2020 we find evidence of widespread p-hacking, publication bias and over-reliance on results from plausibly under-powered studies. Even ignoring questions arising from the characteristics and behaviors of study recruits, the conduct of the research community itself erodes substantially the credibility of these studies' conclusions. The extent of the problems vary across the business, economics, management and marketing research fields (with marketing especially afflicted). The problems are not getting better over time and are much more prevalent than in a comparison set of non-online experiments. We explore correlates of increased credibility.
Schlagwörter: 
online crowd-sourcing platforms
Amazon Mechanical Turk
p-hacking
publication bias
statistical power
research credibility
JEL: 
B41
C13
C40
C90
Dokumentart: 
Working Paper

Datei(en):
Datei
Größe
2.48 MB





Publikationen in EconStor sind urheberrechtlich geschützt.