“I have just returned from the moon:” online survey fraud

Abstract

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to provide a comprehensive review of the respondents’ fraud phenomenon in online panel surveys, delineate data quality issues from surveys of broad and narrow populations, alert fellow researchers about higher incidence of respondents’ fraud in online panel surveys of narrow populations, such as logistics professionals and recommend ways to protect the quality of data received from such surveys. Design/methodology/approach This general review paper has two parts, namely, descriptive and instructional. The current state of online survey and panel data use in supply chain research is examined first through a survey method literature review. Then, a more focused understanding of the phenomenon of fraud in surveys is provided through an analysis of online panel industry literature and psychological academic literature. Common survey design and data cleaning recommendations are critically assessed for their applicability to narrow populations. A survey of warehouse professionals is used to illustrate fraud detection techniques and glean additional, supply chain specific data protection recommendations. Findings Surveys of narrow populations, such as those typically targeted by supply chain researchers, are much more prone to respondents’ fraud. To protect and clean survey data, supply chain researchers need to use many measures that are different from those commonly recommended in methodological survey literature. Research limitations/implications For the first time, the need to distinguish between narrow and broad population surveys has been stated when it comes to data quality issues. The confusion and previously reported “mixed results” from literature reviews on the subject have been explained and a clear direction for future research is suggested: the two categories should be considered separately. Practical implications Specific fraud protection advice is provided to supply chain researchers on the strategic choices and specific aspects for all phases of surveying narrow populations, namely, survey preparation, administration and data cleaning. Originality/value This paper can greatly benefit researchers in several ways. It provides a comprehensive review and analysis of respondents’ fraud in online surveys, an issue poorly understood and rarely addressed in academic research. Drawing from literature from several fields, this paper, for the first time in literature, offers a systematic set of recommendations for narrow population surveys by clearly contrasting them with general population surveys.

Offshore outsourcing of innovation by SMEs: a 4F perspective of governance

“…Accordingly, we ensured our respondents were mainly CEOs and managing directors. We received 223 responses; 23 of these response were eliminated due to (1) a high proportion of missing answers, and (2) the responses having been completed in less than a third of the median time taken for others to complete the survey (Brazhkin, 2020). Although we have included attention check questions to minimize low-quality responses, we have not found any low-quality responses for further elimination.…”

Picky eating is associated with lower life satisfaction and elevated psychological distress and psychosocial impairment in Chinese pregnant women

“…First, the measures used in the present study were generic and might not accurately capture pregnant women's picky eating or disordered eating, which should be addressed in future studies using pregnancy‐specific measures. Second, pregnant women in our study were recruited online; thus, findings may suffer from common issues observed with online survey methodologies (e.g., fraud; Brazhkin, 2020). The present findings should be replicated in pregnant women recruited offline (e.g., from hospitals) with in‐person screening and assessment.…”

Comparing water quality valuation across probability and non‐probability samples

“…Fraudulent behavior relates to self‐misrepresentation or the use of bots to maximize rewards. Generally, surveys of narrow populations are more prone to fraud, which reduces data quality (Brazhkin, 2020). Methods to reduce or detect satisficing and fraudulent behavior include attention checks, bogus questions, open‐ended questions, self‐reports of effort, response times, analyzing choice response patterns and selection of non‐substantive responses, digital fingerprinting, as well as many other methods (Aguinis et al, 2021; Baker et al, 2010; Brazhkin, 2020; Chmielewski & Kucker, 2020; Lawler et al, 2021; Teitcher et al, 2015).…”

“…Generally, surveys of narrow populations are more prone to fraud, which reduces data quality (Brazhkin, 2020). Methods to reduce or detect satisficing and fraudulent behavior include attention checks, bogus questions, open‐ended questions, self‐reports of effort, response times, analyzing choice response patterns and selection of non‐substantive responses, digital fingerprinting, as well as many other methods (Aguinis et al, 2021; Baker et al, 2010; Brazhkin, 2020; Chmielewski & Kucker, 2020; Lawler et al, 2021; Teitcher et al, 2015). 2 One recent study (Goodrich et al, 2023) details experiences of conducting online surveys targeted towards narrow populations (e.g., posting to social media site) that received a high number of fraudulent responses.…”