Institution · 19 researchers
Previously known as: Jack Z
Institution-wide insights - pooled across all 19 researchers at this institution.
Includes figures observed automatically from real Prolific submissions by the Prolific Tea extension, pooled with on-site reviews.
You need an account to share your experience with this researcher.
A blended rating across every researcher grouped under this institution - not one person. Pick a researcher above to see their own rating.
Estimated completion time was 6 mins and I took nearly double that time, I think it still paid well enough though, but the listed time is pretty far off :\ did also contain a few written portions, and one of the questions was a bit confusing bc it was asking any smth I never saw.
This was a very unusual study that required providing detailed opinions on the topic for over 45 minutes, and it was easy for it to take even longer. The survey inconsistently switched between auto-advancing and requiring manual progression, which made it difficult to stay alert. The attention checks were especially easy to miss because they were hidden within the introductory text. Once you got into a rhythm of answering the open-ended questions, it was very easy to overlook one. In my opinion, the study wasn't worth the time or the risk of rejection. It felt like the researcher was using misleading attention checks to collect as much free data as possible. I accepted two of these studies but returned one out of caution. I'd recommend avoiding this researcher and blocking them, as the potential payout doesn't justify the time or the risk.
Quick approval. There is one part slightly confusing but happy to have it approved soon after completion
Falsely claimed i failed an attention check when i did not. It was only a 3 minute study so i returned it to avoid a rejection.
Very odd studies, requires you to give your opinion on the subject matter over 45 minutes (which it goes over very easily). Very long study and seems to move between auto-advancing you or letting you advance yourself to the next question. The attention checks are super easy to miss because you can easily get in a flow describing what you feel and miss them slipping one in the description up top. In my opinion, this is a dishonest, sneaky researcher looking for free data and just is not worth the time or possible rejections if you get rolling. I did twp of these and I returned the other one out of caution. Avoid and block, just not worth it.
The researcher allowed me to return after I asked but did not reply I just noticed the option available.