Skip to main content
Erschienen in: Journal of General Internal Medicine 4/2018

04.01.2018 | Review Paper

Comparing Amazon’s Mechanical Turk Platform to Conventional Data Collection Methods in the Health and Medical Research Literature

verfasst von: Karoline Mortensen, Ph.D., Taylor L. Hughes, B.S.

Erschienen in: Journal of General Internal Medicine | Ausgabe 4/2018

Einloggen, um Zugang zu erhalten

Abstract

Background

The goal of this article is to conduct an assessment of the peer-reviewed primary literature with study objectives to analyze Amazon.​com’s Mechanical Turk (MTurk) as a research tool in a health services research and medical context.

Methods

Searches of Google Scholar and PubMed databases were conducted in February 2017. We screened article titles and abstracts to identify relevant articles that compare data from MTurk samples in a health and medical context to another sample, expert opinion, or other gold standard. Full-text manuscript reviews were conducted for the 35 articles that met the study criteria.

Results

The vast majority of the studies supported the use of MTurk for a variety of academic purposes.

Discussion

The literature overwhelmingly concludes that MTurk is an efficient, reliable, cost-effective tool for generating sample responses that are largely comparable to those collected via more conventional means. Caveats include survey responses may not be generalizable to the US population.
Literatur
1.
Zurück zum Zitat Redmiles EM, Kross S, Pradhan A, Mazurek ML. How well do my results generalize? Comparing security and privacy survey results from MTurk and web panels to the US; 2017. Technical Report of the Computer Science Department at the University of Maryland. http://drum.lib.umd.edu/handle/1903/19164. Redmiles EM, Kross S, Pradhan A, Mazurek ML. How well do my results generalize? Comparing security and privacy survey results from MTurk and web panels to the US; 2017. Technical Report of the Computer Science Department at the University of Maryland. http://​drum.​lib.​umd.​edu/​handle/​1903/​19164.
42.
Zurück zum Zitat Mortensen JM, Musen MA, Noy NF. Crowdsourcing the verification of relationships in biomedical ontologies. AMIA Annual symposium proceedings. 2013;2013:1020–1029.PubMedPubMedCentral Mortensen JM, Musen MA, Noy NF. Crowdsourcing the verification of relationships in biomedical ontologies. AMIA Annual symposium proceedings. 2013;2013:1020–1029.PubMedPubMedCentral
46.
Zurück zum Zitat Shao W, Guan W, Clark MA, et al. Variations in recruitment yield, costs, speed, and participant diversity across internet platforms in a global study examining the efficacy of an HIV/AIDS and HIV testing animated and live-action video. Digital culture & education. 2015;7(1):40–86. Shao W, Guan W, Clark MA, et al. Variations in recruitment yield, costs, speed, and participant diversity across internet platforms in a global study examining the efficacy of an HIV/AIDS and HIV testing animated and live-action video. Digital culture & education. 2015;7(1):40–86.
49.
Metadaten
Titel
Comparing Amazon’s Mechanical Turk Platform to Conventional Data Collection Methods in the Health and Medical Research Literature
verfasst von
Karoline Mortensen, Ph.D.
Taylor L. Hughes, B.S.
Publikationsdatum
04.01.2018
Verlag
Springer US
Erschienen in
Journal of General Internal Medicine / Ausgabe 4/2018
Print ISSN: 0884-8734
Elektronische ISSN: 1525-1497
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11606-017-4246-0

Weitere Artikel der Ausgabe 4/2018

Journal of General Internal Medicine 4/2018 Zur Ausgabe

Leitlinien kompakt für die Innere Medizin

Mit medbee Pocketcards sicher entscheiden.

Seit 2022 gehört die medbee GmbH zum Springer Medizin Verlag

Update Innere Medizin

Bestellen Sie unseren Fach-Newsletter und bleiben Sie gut informiert.