This researcher (going by Elena Marx in consent form) rejected based on "Failed attention check questions". I spoke with the researcher but she refused to provide further info on the issue. I still had the study link so I looked thoroughly into the study again. It turns out, the researcher disguised the attention check questions as part of the highly subjective sentence judgment task to the point where they were not obvious. They read like they were a natural part of the judgement. I contacted the researcher about the unfairly worded attention checks and offered to return instead. She could not care less and was very callous about it. She gave a bunch of excuses ranging from Prolific not allowing them, some other people passing the ACs, and how she intends on treating everyone the 'same' for consistency.
ceu.edu - Prolific Researcher Reviews
Institution · 4 researchers
3.0
Institution-wide rating2 reviews97 views
Institution-wide insights - pooled across all 4 researchers at this institution.
Insights
$25.86/hrMedian hourly pay2 data points
67%Approval rate3 data points
3 minMedian actual time2 data points
Reported feedback
Unfair attention checks1
Includes figures observed automatically from real Prolific submissions by the Prolific Tea extension, pooled with on-site reviews.
Studies seen on Prolific7
- Fairness Study
- The Offer & Response Task
- Sentence creator
- Advice giving
- Jaké hrozby existují v české společnosti a co představuje hrozbu pro vás osobně?
- Ownership dilemmas in joint projects
Write a Review
You need an account to share your experience with this researcher.
2 Reviews
Researchers at this institution
3.0
Institution-wideA blended rating across every researcher grouped under this institution - not one person. Pick a researcher above to see their own rating.
User
1.0
Sentence creatorRejected
Unfair Attention Checks
FairOwl18
5.0
He was very understanding, very good attitude and great to work with