Bot or Not? Detecting and Managing Participant Deception When Conducting Digital Research Remotely: Case Study of a Randomized Controlled Trial.

artificial intelligence false information mHealth applications participant participant deception recruit research subject web-based studies

Journal

Journal of medical Internet research
ISSN: 1438-8871
Titre abrégé: J Med Internet Res
Pays: Canada
ID NLM: 100959882

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
14 09 2023
Historique:
received: 14 02 2023
accepted: 28 06 2023
revised: 19 06 2023
medline: 15 9 2023
pubmed: 14 9 2023
entrez: 14 9 2023
Statut: epublish

Résumé

Evaluating digital interventions using remote methods enables the recruitment of large numbers of participants relatively conveniently and cheaply compared with in-person methods. However, conducting research remotely based on participant self-report with little verification is open to automated "bots" and participant deception. This paper uses a case study of a remotely conducted trial of an alcohol reduction app to highlight and discuss (1) the issues with participant deception affecting remote research trials with financial compensation; and (2) the importance of rigorous data management to detect and address these issues. We recruited participants on the internet from July 2020 to March 2022 for a randomized controlled trial (n=5602) evaluating the effectiveness of an alcohol reduction app, Drink Less. Follow-up occurred at 3 time points, with financial compensation offered (up to £36 [US $39.23]). Address authentication and telephone verification were used to detect 2 kinds of deception: "bots," that is, automated responses generated in clusters; and manual participant deception, that is, participants providing false information. Of the 1142 participants who enrolled in the first 2 months of recruitment, 75.6% (n=863) of them were identified as bots during data screening. As a result, a CAPTCHA (Completely Automated Public Turing Test to Tell Computers and Humans Apart) was added, and after this, no more bots were identified. Manual participant deception occurred throughout the study. Of the 5956 participants (excluding bots) who enrolled in the study, 298 (5%) were identified as false participants. The extent of this decreased from 110 in November 2020, to a negligible level by February 2022 including a number of months with 0. The decline occurred after we added further screening questions such as attention checks, removed the prominence of financial compensation from social media advertising, and added an additional requirement to provide a mobile phone number for identity verification. Data management protocols are necessary to detect automated bots and manual participant deception in remotely conducted trials. Bots and manual deception can be minimized by adding a CAPTCHA, attention checks, a requirement to provide a phone number for identity verification, and not prominently advertising financial compensation on social media. ISRCTN Number ISRCTN64052601; https://doi.org/10.1186/ISRCTN64052601.

Sections du résumé

BACKGROUND
Evaluating digital interventions using remote methods enables the recruitment of large numbers of participants relatively conveniently and cheaply compared with in-person methods. However, conducting research remotely based on participant self-report with little verification is open to automated "bots" and participant deception.
OBJECTIVE
This paper uses a case study of a remotely conducted trial of an alcohol reduction app to highlight and discuss (1) the issues with participant deception affecting remote research trials with financial compensation; and (2) the importance of rigorous data management to detect and address these issues.
METHODS
We recruited participants on the internet from July 2020 to March 2022 for a randomized controlled trial (n=5602) evaluating the effectiveness of an alcohol reduction app, Drink Less. Follow-up occurred at 3 time points, with financial compensation offered (up to £36 [US $39.23]). Address authentication and telephone verification were used to detect 2 kinds of deception: "bots," that is, automated responses generated in clusters; and manual participant deception, that is, participants providing false information.
RESULTS
Of the 1142 participants who enrolled in the first 2 months of recruitment, 75.6% (n=863) of them were identified as bots during data screening. As a result, a CAPTCHA (Completely Automated Public Turing Test to Tell Computers and Humans Apart) was added, and after this, no more bots were identified. Manual participant deception occurred throughout the study. Of the 5956 participants (excluding bots) who enrolled in the study, 298 (5%) were identified as false participants. The extent of this decreased from 110 in November 2020, to a negligible level by February 2022 including a number of months with 0. The decline occurred after we added further screening questions such as attention checks, removed the prominence of financial compensation from social media advertising, and added an additional requirement to provide a mobile phone number for identity verification.
CONCLUSIONS
Data management protocols are necessary to detect automated bots and manual participant deception in remotely conducted trials. Bots and manual deception can be minimized by adding a CAPTCHA, attention checks, a requirement to provide a phone number for identity verification, and not prominently advertising financial compensation on social media.
TRIAL REGISTRATION
ISRCTN Number ISRCTN64052601; https://doi.org/10.1186/ISRCTN64052601.

Identifiants

pubmed: 37707943
pii: v25i1e46523
doi: 10.2196/46523
pmc: PMC10540014
doi:

Substances chimiques

Ethanol 3K9958V90M

Banques de données

ISRCTN
['ISRCTN64052601']

Types de publication

Randomized Controlled Trial Journal Article Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't

Langues

eng

Sous-ensembles de citation

IM

Pagination

e46523

Subventions

Organisme : Department of Health
ID : NIHR127651
Pays : United Kingdom

Informations de copyright

©Gemma Loebenberg, Melissa Oldham, Jamie Brown, Larisa Dinu, Susan Michie, Matt Field, Felix Greaves, Claire Garnett. Originally published in the Journal of Medical Internet Research (https://www.jmir.org), 14.09.2023.

Références

Nicotine Tob Res. 2021 Aug 29;23(10):1810-1812
pubmed: 33876244
Subst Abus. 2020;41(1):3-5
pubmed: 31821108
JMIR Public Health Surveill. 2019 Feb 04;5(1):e12344
pubmed: 30714944
JAMA Netw Open. 2019 Jan 4;2(1):e187355
pubmed: 30681707
PLoS Med. 2010 Mar 24;7(3):e1000251
pubmed: 20352064
JMIR Res Protoc. 2018 Apr 24;7(4):e96
pubmed: 29691203
AIDS Behav. 2008 Nov;12(6):964-73
pubmed: 18240015
Addiction. 2021 Feb;116(2):412-425
pubmed: 33067856
Sleep. 2015 Aug 01;38(8):1229-36
pubmed: 25581921
J Med Internet Res. 2013 Nov 14;15(11):e250
pubmed: 24231040
Transl Behav Med. 2019 Mar 1;9(2):296-307
pubmed: 29733406
Psychol Sex. 2022;13(4):901-911
pubmed: 36439051
Nicotine Tob Res. 2023 Jan 1;25(1):170-172
pubmed: 35962780
J Law Med Ethics. 2015 Spring;43(1):116-33
pubmed: 25846043
F1000Res. 2021 Jun 29;10:511
pubmed: 34646502
Clin Trials. 2013;10(6):935-48
pubmed: 23867223
J Med Internet Res. 2020 Oct 7;22(10):e23021
pubmed: 33026360

Auteurs

Gemma Loebenberg (G)

UCL Tobacco and Alcohol Research Group, University College London, London, United Kingdom.

Melissa Oldham (M)

UCL Tobacco and Alcohol Research Group, University College London, London, United Kingdom.

Jamie Brown (J)

UCL Tobacco and Alcohol Research Group, University College London, London, United Kingdom.

Larisa Dinu (L)

UCL Tobacco and Alcohol Research Group, University College London, London, United Kingdom.

Susan Michie (S)

Clinical Educational and Health Psychology, University College London, London, United Kingdom.

Matt Field (M)

Department of Psychology, University of Sheffield, Sheffield, United Kingdom.

Felix Greaves (F)

Department of Primary Care and Public Health, Imperial College London, London, United Kingdom.

Claire Garnett (C)

UCL Tobacco and Alcohol Research Group, University College London, London, United Kingdom.

Articles similaires

[Redispensing of expensive oral anticancer medicines: a practical application].

Lisanne N van Merendonk, Kübra Akgöl, Bastiaan Nuijen
1.00
Humans Antineoplastic Agents Administration, Oral Drug Costs Counterfeit Drugs

Smoking Cessation and Incident Cardiovascular Disease.

Jun Hwan Cho, Seung Yong Shin, Hoseob Kim et al.
1.00
Humans Male Smoking Cessation Cardiovascular Diseases Female
Humans United States Aged Cross-Sectional Studies Medicare Part C
1.00
Humans Yoga Low Back Pain Female Male

Classifications MeSH