Amazon Mechanical Turk in Organizational Psychology: An Evaluation and Practical Recommendations

By Janelle H. Cheung, D. Burns, Rob Sinclair, Michael T. Sliter. 2017

438 citations recorded by the source corpus.

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

MTurk Character Misrepresentation: Assessment and Solutions (2017, background): “Therefore, and as recently recommended by others (Cheung et al. 2016; Farrell, Grenier, and Leiby 2017), it is important for researchers to become familiar with these Turker communities and follow the chatroom discussions when a study is live.”
Systems Perspective of Amazon Mechanical Turk for Organizational Research: Review and Recommendations (2017, background): “…psychological research, some scholars have raised concerns about its use and current debates surround whether MTurk is appropriate for organizational research (see Berinsky et al., 2012; Goodman et al., 2012; Crump et al., 2013; Harms and DeSimone, 2015; Cheung et al., 2016; Keith and Harms, 2016).”
MTurk Research: Review and Recommendations (2020, background): “…9 Buhrmester, Talaifar, and Gosling (2018); 10 Chandler, Mueller, and Paolacci (2014); 11 Chandler, Paolacci, Peer, Mueller, and Ratliff (2015); 12 Cheung, Burns, Sinclair, and Sliter (2017); 13 Clifford and Jerit (2014); 14 Deng, Joshi, and Galliers (2016); 15 Feitosa, Joseph, and Newman (2015);…”