I was reading this,
https://blog.prolific.ac/bots-and-data-quality-on-crowdsourcing-platforms/
It basically says Mturk has this problem and outlines it then says they don't and outlines that.
Yeah, it also says that they probably aren't "bots" and everything else that they're saying is true.
"We take any data quality reports very seriously and whenever researchers have suspicions about accounts they can report the relevant participant IDs to us we investigate the individual accounts as well as any shared patterns between them.
We analyse our internal data to monitor for unusual usage patterns, and data reports from researchers."
But, I don't agree that the take-away is "Prolific is trying to fuck Mturk by promoting that bots are killing the data and that's why there are less requesters."
More accurately, in that context, they're saying that MTurk is a largely unmonitored platform with less oversight, and security features. Both of those things have always been true and are no secret. AMT will let nearly anything post, and will let nearly anyone do it, and rarely intercedes in any fashion, other than to take their cut of the cash. Again, always been true.
I can see how this statement, "Unlike Mturk, Prolific is dedicated to empowering great research, so data quality is our top priority." could be slightly inflammatory but, it's still accurate, as Mturk's top priorities are quantity of completed work and profit.
All of that said, I use both. They're both very different and barely competitors. But, they didn't start the whole "bot panic" nonsense. In fact, they debunk it at the beginning.
Not trying to be argumentative, at all but, it's silly to keep calling it "bot panic" since it's nearly a consensus that there were probably no bots involved. Just people who did work that was so bad that it was indistinguishable from something that a bot would submit, which is pretty damn bad work, if you ask me. Which you probably wouldn't because you'd get an answer like this.
tl:dr Prolific confirms, what most of us knew from the beginning, that there were probably no bots and states that they have more safety features, regarding quality of data.
Thanks for the link.
Really appreciate finally getting to read some accurate information regarding this incident, without rumor or scare tactics.