Maintenance Notice

Due to necessary scheduled maintenance, the JMIR Publications website will be unavailable from Wednesday, July 01, 2020 at 8:00 PM to 10:00 PM EST. We apologize in advance for any inconvenience this may cause you.

Who will be affected?

Currently submitted to: Journal of Medical Internet Research

Date Submitted: Apr 7, 2026
Open Peer Review Period: Apr 7, 2026 - Jun 2, 2026
(currently open for review)

Warning: This is an author submission that is not peer-reviewed or edited. Preprints - unless they show as "accepted" - should not be relied on to guide clinical practice or health-related behavior and should not be reported in news media as established information.

Detection and Mitigation of Fraudulent Participants in Online Psychology Research: Insights from Research Experiences

  • Zhuoni Xiao; 
  • Lily Verity; 
  • Laura Riddleston; 
  • Dejla Hoxha; 
  • Aja Murray; 
  • Iain Hardie; 
  • Hannah Milbourn; 
  • Liz Kirby; 
  • Emily Long; 
  • Victoria Palmer; 
  • Louise Truscott; 
  • Sarah Robertson; 
  • Robin Flaig; 
  • Heather Whalley

ABSTRACT

Background:

The rise of online data collection in psychological and health research has been accompanied by an increase in fraudulent participation, threatening data quality and research integrity. Method: We conducted semi-structured interviews and an open-ended questionnaire with six research teams across the UK who encountered fraudulent participants while conducting online studies across diverse populations (children aged 10+, adolescents, mid- older-aged adults aged 55 – 75, and general adult populations). Studies employed multiple methodologies, including online surveys, ecological momentary assessment (EMA), qualitative online interviews, and online diaries. Teams were selected to represent a range of methodological contexts; findings are intended as an exploratory contribution to awareness and discussion rather than a comprehensive account of fraud experiences across online research.

Results:

Reported fraudulent participation rates ranged from 1% to 89%, with social media recruitment platforms (particularly Facebook and X/Twitter) being most vulnerable. Analysis revealed that the manifestation of fraud varied by study design and population, with compensation-offering studies experiencing higher rates. Standard detection methods employed by studies included IP address inspection, address verification, demographic consistency checks, and interviewer intuition for qualitative studies. Teams reported significant impacts on research resources, study timelines (including a 2-month study pause in one case), and the decision-making process in ethics applications. In addition, teams also developed preventive strategies through experience. Conclusion: This paper presents an exploratory, experience-based framework intended to raise awareness of online research fraud and support researchers in thinking through context-appropriate detection and prevention strategies. Findings suggest that one-size-fits-all solutions are inadequate and that approaches need to be tailored to study design, recruitment methods, and resource constraints. We recommend that fraud mitigation planning be considered a standard requirement in research funding applications.


 Citation

Please cite as:

Xiao Z, Verity L, Riddleston L, Hoxha D, Murray A, Hardie I, Milbourn H, Kirby L, Long E, Palmer V, Truscott L, Robertson S, Flaig R, Whalley H

Detection and Mitigation of Fraudulent Participants in Online Psychology Research: Insights from Research Experiences

JMIR Preprints. 07/04/2026:96675

DOI: 10.2196/preprints.96675

URL: https://preprints.jmir.org/preprint/96675

Download PDF


Request queued. Please wait while the file is being generated. It may take some time.

© The authors. All rights reserved. This is a privileged document currently under peer-review/community review (or an accepted/rejected manuscript). Authors have provided JMIR Publications with an exclusive license to publish this preprint on it's website for review and ahead-of-print citation purposes only. While the final peer-reviewed paper may be licensed under a cc-by license on publication, at this stage authors and publisher expressively prohibit redistribution of this draft paper other than for review purposes.