help

This piece hits the nail on the head, including the recs — all 5 things Sean recommends that researchers ask about are widely done (for instance Research Defender, which he mentions, does all of them). But as he says it's not transparent enough which providers do what & the old checks aren't enough.

Anyone know this study? Having trouble finding w/o logging into X

And from Sunshine Hillygus at Duke:

I love that this includes a *self-reported* measure of whether respondent was just trying to be funny with some responses.

(I don't even know what "Trump Bee Movie" means here but I will certainly google)

From Matt Tyler at Rice on measuring support for beliefs in conspiracies: One idea is to look at whether respondents report consistent beliefs over multiple questions in the same survey, with different wording.

(Also: bonus Olympics content!)

From Joseph Simpian at NYU -- this time looking at an in-person probability survey of teens that asked whether they were adopted. In a more in-depth follow-up, some who said "yes" were misreporting -- and they were much more different from rest of sample than real adoptees

Also some A+ clipart

Leib Littman at CloudResearch notes that acquiescence bias is often exacerbated on some opt-in online panels typically used for consumer research, where fraudulent respondents have an incentive to say "yes" and route themselves into more surveys.

In the US ADA = Americans with Disabilities Act, so I read this sign as "accessible to anyone but my brother"