IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0198835.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Are Mechanical Turk worker samples representative of health status and health behaviors in the U.S.?

Author

Listed:
  • Kelly Walters
  • Dimitri A Christakis
  • Davene R Wright

Abstract

Introduction: Amazon’s Mechanical Turk (MTurk) is frequently used to administer health-related surveys and experiments at a low cost, but little is known about its representativeness with regards to health status and behaviors. Methods: A cross-sectional survey comprised of questions from the nationally-representative 2014 Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System (BRFSS) and 2014 National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES) was administered to 591 MTurk workers and 393 masters in 2016. Health status (asthma, depression, BMI, and general health), health behaviors (influenza vaccination, health insurance, smoking, and physical activity), and demographic characteristics of the two MTurk populations (workers and masters) were compared to each other and, using Poisson regression, to a nationally-representative BRFSS and NHANES samples. Results: Workers and master demographics were similar. MTurk users were more likely to be aged under 50 years compared to the national sample (86% vs. 55%) and more likely to complete a college degree than the national sample (50% vs. 26%). Adjusting for covariates, MTurk users were less likely to be vaccinated for influenza, to smoke, to have asthma, to self-report being in excellent or very good health, to exercise, and have health insurance but over twice as likely to screen positive for depression relative to a national sample. Results were fairly consistent among different age groups. Conclusions: MTurk workers are not a generalizable population with regards to health status and behaviors; deviations did not follow a trend. Appropriate health-related uses for MTurk and ways to improve upon the generalizability of MTurk health studies are proposed.

Suggested Citation

  • Kelly Walters & Dimitri A Christakis & Davene R Wright, 2018. "Are Mechanical Turk worker samples representative of health status and health behaviors in the U.S.?," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 13(6), pages 1-10, June.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0198835
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0198835
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0198835
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0198835&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0198835?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0198835. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.