Red Flags of Fraudulent Qual Respondents

A reliable, proactive recruitment team is crucial for successful qualitative research. Fake or fraudulent respondents are a waste of time and resources at best, and a danger to your insights at worst. With the rise of online panels and tech-savvy participants, ensuring authenticity has become more challenging than ever. Our recruitment and management teams are dedicated to spotting these red flags during recruitment and prevent participant fraud before it impacts our studies. 

 In this post, we’ll explore the combination of red flags our recruitment team has noticed to prevent fraudulent, and proactive measures used to ensure the integrity of our research, safeguarding the quality of insights for our clients. 

Misleading or overly complex email addresses 

One area we look towards to identify fraudulent research participants is their email address. With AI bots, thousands of new email addresses can be created in seconds, however, they tend to stand out from a real human’s email address. 

A common red flag for a fraudulent research participant is that their email address is a series of nonsensical letters and numbers or has a completely different name than what’s listed on the profile. Bots tend to make these profiles in rapid succession, and they all tend to use the same pattern and email provider (especially Gmail). If you notice one questionable email, be sure to look at the profiles created around the same time & confirm it’s not a one-off. 

 

Google Phone number  

Like the frequent use of Gmail accounts, fraudulent respondent profiles almost always are using a Google phone number via Google Voice. The voicemail will refer to the owner of the number as “the Google subscriber” and will never be voice recorded message that legitimate respondents frequently have.   

 

Fraudulent Respondents

 

Area code doesn’t match location 

Because these potential wrongdoers are using a Google Voice number, their area code doesn’t typically match the location listed on their profile. Respondents move and this isn’t a guarantee that the respondent is dishonest, it’s certainly enough to warrant skepticism. Especially with research being conducted in specific markets, a phone number with an accurate area code is ideal. 

 

Confusion over the telephone 

Not all fraudulent respondents are AI bots, and real people will occasionally call back after you leave a voicemail. These individuals are often soft-spoken on the telephone and oftentimes they do not have an accent that would coincide with their phone number or their residence.  

Fraudulent respondents that were dishonest on initial, electronic screening rarely recall what combination of answers that led to them incorrectly qualify. Observation Baltimore, a field service division of Ironwood Insights, always calls their qualitative participants to confirm the legitimacy of their responses. If there is noticeable confusion or answers that change, recruiters can politely move on. 

 

When in doubt, always speak with your research participants on the telephone prior to research. Not only will this provide you with confidence that your insights will be from a legitimate source, but also gives you the opportunity to clear up any questions your respondents may have about the research process. Clear communication is key!  

This entry was posted on Tuesday, November 5th, 2024 at 3:03 pm. Both comments and pings are currently closed.

Comments are closed.