Similarities and Differences in Tobacco Control Research Findings from Convenience and Probability Samples

Annals of Behavioral Medicine

Volumn 53, Issue 5, 2019, Pages 476-485

  Jeong, Michelle ^a,b   Zhang, Dongyu ^c   Morgan, Jennifer C ^a   Ross, Jennifer Cornacchione ^d   Osman, Amira ^b   Boynton, Marcella H ^a,b   Mendel, Jennifer R ^b   Brewer, Noel T ^a,b  

^a IL   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF NORTH CAROLINA   (United States)

^c GEORGETOWN UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF MEDICINE   (United States)

^d WAKE FOREST SCHOOL OF MEDICINE   (United States)

Author keywords

Convenience sampling; Health behavior; Mechanical Turk; Tobacco control; Validity

Indexed keywords

ADOLESCENT; ADULT; ATTITUDE TO HEALTH; EPIDEMIOLOGY; FEMALE; HUMAN; MALE; PATIENT SELECTION; SMOKING; YOUNG ADULT;

ADOLESCENT; ADULT; EPIDEMIOLOGIC METHODS; FEMALE; HEALTH KNOWLEDGE, ATTITUDES, PRACTICE; HUMANS; MALE; PATIENT SELECTION; SAMPLING STUDIES; TOBACCO SMOKING; YOUNG ADULT;

EID: 85066319398     PISSN: 08836612     EISSN: 15324796     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1093/abm/kay059     Document Type: Article

References (30)

1. Brick JM. The future of survey sampling. Public Opinion Quarterly. 2011;75:872-888.
2. Baker R, Brick JM, Bates NA, et al. Summary report of the AAPOR Task Force on non-probability sampling. Journal of Survey Statistics and Methodology. 2013;1:90-143.
3. Cochran WG. Sampling Techniques. 3rd ed. New York: Wiley and Sons; 1977.
4. Groves RM. Three eras of survey research. Public Opinion Quarterly. 2011;75:861-871.
5. Lucas JW. Theory-testing, generalization, and the problem of external validity. Sociol Theory. 2003;21:236-253.
6. Kardes FR. In defense of experimental consumer psychology. Journal of Consumer Psychology. 1996;5:279-296.
7. Peterson RA. On the use of college students in social science research: Insights from a second-order meta-analysis. Journal of Consumer Research. 2001;28:450-461.
8. Buhrmester M, Kwang T, Gosling SD. Amazon's mechanical turk: A new source of inexpensive, yet high-quality, data? Perspectives on Psychological Science. 2011;6:3-5.
9. Mason W, Suri S. Conducting behavioral research on Amazon's Mechanical Turk. Behavior Research Methods. 2012;44:1-23.
10. Chandler J, Shapiro D. Conducting clinical research using crowdsourced convenience samples. Annual Review of Clinical Psychology. 2016;12:53-81.
11. Boynton MH, Agans RP, Bowling JM, et al. Understanding how perceptions of tobacco constituents and the FDA relate to effective and credible tobacco risk messaging: A national phone survey of U.S. adults, 2014-2015. BMC Public Health. 2016;16:516.
12. Baig SA, Byron MJ, Boynton MH, Brewer NT, Ribisl KM. Communicating about cigarette smoke constituents: An experimental comparison of two messaging strategies. Journal of Behavioral Medicine. 2017;40:352-359.
13. Pepper JK, Byron MJ, Ribisl KM, Brewer NT. How hearing about harmful chemicals affects smokers' interest in dual use of cigarettes and e-cigarettes. Preventive Medicine. 2017;96:144-148.
14. Baig SA, Pepper JK, Morgan JC, Brewer NT. Social identity and support for counteracting tobacco company marketing that targets vulnerable populations. Social Science & Medicine. 2017;182:136-141.
15. Brewer NT, Morgan JC, Baig SA, et al. Public understanding of cigarette smoke constituents: Three US surveys. Tobacco Control. 2016;26:592-599.
16. Mendel JR, Baig SA, Hall MG, et al. Brand switching and toxic chemicals in cigarette smoke: A national study. PLoS One. 2018;13:e0189928.
17. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System Survey. Available at https://www.cdc.gov/brfss/. Accessibility verified May 9, 2018.
18. National Institutes of Health, United States Department of Health and Human Services. Population Assessment of Tobacco and Health Study. Available at https://pathstudyinfo. nih.gov/UI/StudyOverviewMobile.aspx. Accessibility verified May 9, 2018.
19. Mutz DC. Population-Based Survey Experiments. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press; 2011.
20. StataCorp. Stata Statistical Software: Release 13. College Station, TX: StataCorp LP; 2013.
21. Mullinix KJ, Leeper TJ, Druckman JN, Freese J. The generalizability of survey experiments. Journal of Experimental Political Science. 2016;2:109-138.
22. Berinsky AJ, Huber GA, Lenz GS. Evaluating online labor markets for experimental research: Amazon.com's Mechanical Turk. Political Analysis. 2012;20:351-368.
23. Weinberg J, Freese J, McElhattan D. Comparing data characteristics and results of an online factorial survey between a population-based and a crowdsource-recruited sample. Sociological Science. 2014;1:292-310.
24. Rand DG. The promise of Mechanical Turk: How online labor markets can help theorists run behavioral experiments. Journal of Theoretical Biology. 2012;299:172-179.
25. Kraemer JD, Strasser AA, Lindblom EN, Niaura RS, Mays D. Crowdsourced data collection for public health: A comparison with nationally representative, population tobacco use data. Preventive Medicine. 2017;102:93-99.
26. Huff C, Tingley D. "Who are these people?" Evaluating the demographic characteristics and political preferences of MTurk survey respondents. Research & Politics. 2015;2:1-11.
27. Simons DJ, Chabris CF. Common (mis)beliefs about memory: A replication and comparison of telephone and Mechanical Turk survey methods. PLoS One. 2012;7:e51876.
28. Yank V, Agarwal S, Loftus P, Asch S, Rehkopf D. Crowdsourced health data: Comparability to a US National Survey, 2013-2015. American Journal of Public Health. 2017;107:1283-1289.
29. Paolacci G, Chandler J, Ipeirotis P. Running experiments on Amazon Mechanical Turk. Judgment and Decision Making. 2010;5:411-419.
30. Shadish WR, Cook TD, Campbell DT. Experimental and Quasi-Experimental Designs for Generalized Causal Inference. Belmont, CA: Wadworth Cengage Learning; 2002.