Skip to main content
medRxiv
  • Home
  • About
  • Submit
  • ALERTS / RSS
Advanced Search

Did people really drink bleach to prevent COVID-19? A tale of problematic respondents and a guide for measuring rare events in survey data

View ORCID ProfileLeib Litman, View ORCID ProfileZohn Rosen, View ORCID ProfileCheskie Rosenzweig, View ORCID ProfileSarah L. Weinberger-Litman, View ORCID ProfileAaron J. Moss, Jonathan Robinson
doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/2020.12.11.20246694
Leib Litman
1Prime Research Solutions, Queens, NY
2Department of Psychology, Lander College
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for Leib Litman
  • For correspondence: leib.litman@touro.edu
Zohn Rosen
3Department of Health Policy and Management, Mailman School of Public Health, Columbia University
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for Zohn Rosen
Cheskie Rosenzweig
1Prime Research Solutions, Queens, NY
4Department of Clinical Psychology, Columbia University
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for Cheskie Rosenzweig
Sarah L. Weinberger-Litman
5Department of Psychology, Marymount Manhattan College
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for Sarah L. Weinberger-Litman
Aaron J. Moss
1Prime Research Solutions, Queens, NY
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for Aaron J. Moss
Jonathan Robinson
1Prime Research Solutions, Queens, NY
6Department of Computer Science, Lander College
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • Abstract
  • Full Text
  • Info/History
  • Metrics
  • Data/Code
  • Preview PDF
Loading

Abstract

Society is becoming increasingly dependent on survey research. However, surveys can be impacted by participants who are non-attentive, respond randomly to survey questions, and misrepresent who they are and their true attitudes. The impact that such respondents can have on public health research has rarely been systematically examined. In this study we examine whether Americans began to engage in dangerous cleaning practices to avoid Covid-19 infection. Prior reports have suggested that people began to engage in highly dangerous cleaning practices during the Covid-19 pandemic, including ingesting household cleansers such as bleach. In a series of studies totaling close to 1400 respondents, we show that 80-90% of reports of household cleanser ingestion are made by problematic respondents. These respondents report impossible claims such as ‘recently having had a fatal heart attack’ and ‘eating concrete for its iron content’ at a similar rate to ingesting household cleaners. Additionally, respondents’ frequent misreading or misinterpreting the intent of questions accounted for the rest of such claims. Once inattentive, mischievous, and careless respondents are taken out of the analytic sample we find no evidence that people ingest cleansers. The relationship between dangerous cleaning practices and health outcomes also becomes non-significant once problematic respondents are taken out of the analytic sample. These results show that reported ingestion of household cleaners and other similar dangerous practices are an artifact of problematic respondent bias. The implications of these findings for public health and medical survey research, as well as best practices for avoiding problematic respondents in surveys are discussed.

Competing Interest Statement

Multiple authors of this manuscript [L.L., C.R., A.M., & J.R.] have the following potential competing interest: these authors are employed at Prime Research Solutions, the company that owns CloudResearch. CloudResearch provides researchers with access to online research participants and tools that make it easy to run online studies and maintain data quality.

Funding Statement

There was no external funding for this research.

Author Declarations

I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.

Yes

The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:

Our research was approved by IntegReview, an independent institutional review board that reviews research involving human subjects.

All necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived.

Yes

I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).

Yes

I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.

Yes

Data Availability

Data are available upon request.

Copyright 
The copyright holder for this preprint is the author/funder, who has granted medRxiv a license to display the preprint in perpetuity. It is made available under a CC-BY-NC-ND 4.0 International license.
Back to top
PreviousNext
Posted December 11, 2020.
Download PDF
Data/Code
Email

Thank you for your interest in spreading the word about medRxiv.

NOTE: Your email address is requested solely to identify you as the sender of this article.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
Did people really drink bleach to prevent COVID-19? A tale of problematic respondents and a guide for measuring rare events in survey data
(Your Name) has forwarded a page to you from medRxiv
(Your Name) thought you would like to see this page from the medRxiv website.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Share
Did people really drink bleach to prevent COVID-19? A tale of problematic respondents and a guide for measuring rare events in survey data
Leib Litman, Zohn Rosen, Cheskie Rosenzweig, Sarah L. Weinberger-Litman, Aaron J. Moss, Jonathan Robinson
medRxiv 2020.12.11.20246694; doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/2020.12.11.20246694
Digg logo Reddit logo Twitter logo CiteULike logo Facebook logo Google logo Mendeley logo
Citation Tools
Did people really drink bleach to prevent COVID-19? A tale of problematic respondents and a guide for measuring rare events in survey data
Leib Litman, Zohn Rosen, Cheskie Rosenzweig, Sarah L. Weinberger-Litman, Aaron J. Moss, Jonathan Robinson
medRxiv 2020.12.11.20246694; doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/2020.12.11.20246694

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like
  • Google Plus One

Subject Area

  • Public and Global Health
Subject Areas
All Articles
  • Addiction Medicine (62)
  • Allergy and Immunology (142)
  • Anesthesia (46)
  • Cardiovascular Medicine (412)
  • Dentistry and Oral Medicine (68)
  • Dermatology (47)
  • Emergency Medicine (142)
  • Endocrinology (including Diabetes Mellitus and Metabolic Disease) (171)
  • Epidemiology (4843)
  • Forensic Medicine (3)
  • Gastroenterology (183)
  • Genetic and Genomic Medicine (674)
  • Geriatric Medicine (70)
  • Health Economics (191)
  • Health Informatics (625)
  • Health Policy (318)
  • Health Systems and Quality Improvement (203)
  • Hematology (85)
  • HIV/AIDS (156)
  • Infectious Diseases (except HIV/AIDS) (5322)
  • Intensive Care and Critical Care Medicine (328)
  • Medical Education (93)
  • Medical Ethics (25)
  • Nephrology (75)
  • Neurology (685)
  • Nursing (42)
  • Nutrition (113)
  • Obstetrics and Gynecology (126)
  • Occupational and Environmental Health (205)
  • Oncology (439)
  • Ophthalmology (140)
  • Orthopedics (36)
  • Otolaryngology (89)
  • Pain Medicine (35)
  • Palliative Medicine (16)
  • Pathology (129)
  • Pediatrics (194)
  • Pharmacology and Therapeutics (131)
  • Primary Care Research (84)
  • Psychiatry and Clinical Psychology (777)
  • Public and Global Health (1810)
  • Radiology and Imaging (323)
  • Rehabilitation Medicine and Physical Therapy (138)
  • Respiratory Medicine (255)
  • Rheumatology (86)
  • Sexual and Reproductive Health (69)
  • Sports Medicine (62)
  • Surgery (100)
  • Toxicology (23)
  • Transplantation (29)
  • Urology (37)