Convenience Sampling Methods in Psychology: A Comparison Between Crowdsourced and Student Samples.

Traditional convenience sampling methods relying solely on student participants have raised concerns about the external validity of psychology research findings. Crowdsourced participant sampling methods, like Qualtrics online panels, may offer a viable alternative by minimizing barriers to external...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Published in:Canadian Journal of Behavioural Science Vol. 57; no. 3; pp. 229 - 239
Main Authors: Novielli, Julia, Kane, Leanne, Ashbaugh, Andrea R.
Format: Article
Published: Canadian Psychological Association Jul2025
Subjects:
Online Access:View this record in EBSCOhost
fields @attributes:
  recordID: 1
pdfLink:
plink: https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ssf&AN=186165205&site=ehost-live
header:
  @attributes:
    shortDbName: ssf
    uiTerm: 186165205
    longDbName: Social Sciences Full Text (H.W. Wilson)
    uiTag: AN
  controlInfo:
    bkinfo:
    jinfo:
      jid:
        0008400X
        FYI
      jtl: Canadian Journal of Behavioural Science
      issn: 0008400X
      maglogo: N
    pubinfo:
      dt: Jul2025
      vid: 57
      iid: 3
      pid: 98
      pub: Canadian Psychological Association
    artinfo:
      ui:
        186165205
        10.1037/cbs0000394
      ppf: 229
      ppct: 10
      formats:
      tig:
        atl: Convenience Sampling Methods in Psychology: A Comparison Between Crowdsourced and Student Samples.
      aug:
        au:
          Novielli, Julia
          Kane, Leanne
          Ashbaugh, Andrea R.
        affil: Department of Psychology, University of Ottawa
      su:
        Canada
        Crowdsourcing
        Self-evaluation
        Mental health
        Human research subjects
        Universities & colleges
        Age distribution
        Psychology
        Race
        Marital status
        Sociodemographic factors
        Psychology of college students
        Employment
        Psychiatric diagnosis
        Patient selection
        Statistical sampling
        Descriptive statistics
        Comparative studies
      sug:
        subj:
          Crowdsourcing
          Self-evaluation
          Mental health
          Human research subjects
          Universities & colleges
          Age distribution
          Psychology
          Race
          Marital status
          Sociodemographic factors
          Psychology of college students
          Employment
          Canada
          Offices of Mental Health Practitioners (except Physicians)
          Marketing Research and Public Opinion Polling
          Colleges, Universities, and Professional Schools
          Psychiatric diagnosis
          Patient selection
          Statistical sampling
          Descriptive statistics
          Comparative studies
      keyword:
        convenience samples
        crowdsourced data
        Qualtrics
        student samples
        validity
        échantillons d'étudiants
        échantillons de commodité
        données issues de production participative
        validité
        convenience samples
        crowdsourced data
        Qualtrics
        student samples
        validity
        échantillons d'étudiants
        échantillons de commodité
        données issues de production participative
        validité
      ab: Traditional convenience sampling methods relying solely on student participants have raised concerns about the external validity of psychology research findings. Crowdsourced participant sampling methods, like Qualtrics online panels, may offer a viable alternative by minimizing barriers to external validity. However, our understanding of the reliability and external validity of data from these sources is limited. Utilizing secondary data from a larger study conducted in Canada, the present study sought to explore differences between a Qualtrics-recruited sample (n = 295) and a sample recruited via a university participant pool (n = 270) on sociodemographic characteristics, participant response characteristics, and mental health variables. Differences were found between sample source on sociodemographic characteristics such as participant age, racial background, marital status, and occupational status. The samples differed on participant response characteristics, with the Qualtrics sample demonstrating a higher failure rate on the total attention check measure and shorter survey completion time compared to the student sample. The sample sources also differed on mental health, with a higher prevalence of self-reported mental disorder diagnosis and higher levels of depression, anxiety, stress, and social anxiety symptoms in the Qualtrics sample compared to the student sample. Findings suggest that although Qualtrics panel data may be of lower quality than that of student pool samples with regard to attentive responding, it may still provide a useful recruitment source for clinical and occupational psychology researchers. When deciding on a recruitment method, researchers in psychology should aim to balance convenient access to representative samples with data quality.
      pubtype: Academic Journal
      doctype: Article
      src: R
    language: English
    refInfo:
    copyright:
      @attributes:
        flag: N
    holdings:
      @attributes:
        islocal: N