IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/
MyIDEAS: Log in (now much improved!) to save this paper

MTurk Survey on "Mood and Personality". Documentation

Listed author(s):
  • Marc Höglinger

    ()

  • Ben Jann

    ()

Registered author(s):

Social desirability and the fear of negative consequences often deter a considerable share of survey respondents from responding truthfully to sensitive questions. Thus, resulting prevalence estimates are biased. Indirect techniques for surveying sensitive questions such as the Randomized Response Technique are intended to mitigate misreporting by providing complete concealment of individual answers. However, it is far from clear whether these indirect techniques actually produce more valid measurements than standard direct questioning. In order to evaluate the validity of different sensitive question techniques we carried out an online validation experiment at Amazon Mechanical Turk in which respondents' self-reports of norm-breaking behavior (cheating in dice games) were validated against observed behavior. This document describes the design of the validation experiment and provides details on the questionnaire, the different sensitive question technique implementations, the field work, and the resulting dataset. The appendix contains a codebook of the data and facsimiles of the questionnaire pages and other survey materials.

If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.

File URL: http://repec.sowi.unibe.ch/files/wp17/ASQ-MTurk-2013.pdf
File Function: documentation
Download Restriction: no

File URL: http://repec.sowi.unibe.ch/files/wp17/ASQ-MTurk-2013.dta
File Function: data file (Stata 13)
Download Restriction: no

File URL: http://repec.sowi.unibe.ch/files/wp17/ASQ-MTurk-2013-source.zip
File Function: raw data and do-files
Download Restriction: no

Paper provided by University of Bern, Department of Social Sciences in its series University of Bern Social Sciences Working Papers with number 17.

as
in new window

Length: 169 pages
Date of creation: 15 Feb 2016
Handle: RePEc:bss:wpaper:17
Contact details of provider: Web page: http://www.sowi.unibe.ch/

References listed on IDEAS
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:

as
in new window


  1. John Horton & David Rand & Richard Zeckhauser, 2011. "The online laboratory: conducting experiments in a real labor market," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 14(3), pages 399-425, September.
  2. Marc Höglinger & Ben Jann & Andreas Diekmann, 2014. "Online Survey on "Exams and Written Papers". Documentation," University of Bern Social Sciences Working Papers 8, University of Bern, Department of Social Sciences, revised 06 Oct 2014.
  3. Urs Fischbacher & Franziska Föllmi-Heusi, 2013. "Lies In Disguise—An Experimental Study On Cheating," Journal of the European Economic Association, European Economic Association, vol. 11(3), pages 525-547, 06.
  4. Andreas Diekmann, 2012. "Making Use of “Benford’s Law†for the Randomized Response Technique," Sociological Methods & Research, , vol. 41(2), pages 325-334, May.
Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:bss:wpaper:17. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Ben Jann)

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.

If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link to it, you can help with 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 profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

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

This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis using RePEc data.