Discussion on Recruitment Panels: Experiences and Recommendations

Maegan P. · 2025-02-25 03:24:08.817762+00

:question: I’m wondering what recruitment panels y’all are using and what your experience has been. Recently, I had a not-so-great experience with Maze Recruit. Thanks for your time!

Dovetail Champions

Discussion on Recruitment Panels: Experiences and Recommendations | Dovetail Champions

13 comments

· Sorted by Oldest

Monika R.
·
·
I use respondent.io (very expensive and respondents lie a lot in screeners) and prolific.com (much cheaper, but I don't like the predefined screening criteria).
Alia K.
·
·
I also use respondent.io. It used to be a lot cheaper, unfortunately. Although some people can lie on their screeners, I do like that I have the option to deny paying them if I find it's quite obvious when I speak to them. However, big waste of time
Alia K.
·
·
Monika R. curious as I can't see what the screener questions are. Are you able to filter participants based on location?
Stephanie P.
·
·
We use userinterviews, with good screeners you can generally find good participants. In our industry we've had less success with respondent. We also have our own panel of customer users we've been building over time.
Nathalie T.
·
·
We've also used UserInterviews.com for some usability testing. Seemed pretty decent enough to try them again for a future project!
Ashley
·
·
We're looking at switching to Maze recruit rn, would you be able to share a bit more about your experience?
Monika R.
·
·
Alia K. Yes, location is there (52 countries, I think) together with other parameters, but unfortunately not the ones I need. But I have a specific target, so maybe these would be good for you.
Maegan P.
·
·
Thank you to all who've responded so far! Really helpful info as I continue to evaluate options. Ashley My experience was there were a ton of low-quality participants, and then the flow to replace those participants was slow and painful. There were bugs in the UI for flagging the participant, and then to actually replace them it's all email interactions which was quite time-consuming.
👀1
Monika R.
·
·
When it comes to replacing poor quality participants, I had a really good experience with usertesting.com.
➕1
Maegan P.
·
·
Laura N.
Laura N.
·
·
Thank you for tagging this thread Maegan P.! I met with a rep from UserInterviews last week and it seemed very promising! Respondent.io has been generally decent quality for us as long as you’re very tricksy with the screener - I did have one liar slip through recently and it was an awkward waste of time. We use them for quick, ad-hoc studies as the maximum number of participants you can recruit for a project is 100 I believe?
Maegan P.
·
·
Great to hear! I hope it works out. Thanks for sharing your experience with Respondent
Emi F.
·
·
I've used UserInterviews on their pay-per-participant plan and it worked pretty well. Only had a few folks who probably should have been screened out.
🙏1

Loading comments

Monika R.
·
·
I use respondent.io (very expensive and respondents lie a lot in screeners) and prolific.com (much cheaper, but I don't like the predefined screening criteria).
Alia K.
·
·
I also use respondent.io. It used to be a lot cheaper, unfortunately. Although some people can lie on their screeners, I do like that I have the option to deny paying them if I find it's quite obvious when I speak to them. However, big waste of time
Alia K.
·
·
Monika R. curious as I can't see what the screener questions are. Are you able to filter participants based on location?
Stephanie P.
·
·
We use userinterviews, with good screeners you can generally find good participants. In our industry we've had less success with respondent. We also have our own panel of customer users we've been building over time.
Nathalie T.
·
·
We've also used UserInterviews.com for some usability testing. Seemed pretty decent enough to try them again for a future project!
Ashley
·
·
We're looking at switching to Maze recruit rn, would you be able to share a bit more about your experience?
Monika R.
·
·
Alia K. Yes, location is there (52 countries, I think) together with other parameters, but unfortunately not the ones I need. But I have a specific target, so maybe these would be good for you.
Maegan P.
·
·
Thank you to all who've responded so far! Really helpful info as I continue to evaluate options. Ashley My experience was there were a ton of low-quality participants, and then the flow to replace those participants was slow and painful. There were bugs in the UI for flagging the participant, and then to actually replace them it's all email interactions which was quite time-consuming.
👀1
Monika R.
·
·
When it comes to replacing poor quality participants, I had a really good experience with usertesting.com.
➕1
Maegan P.
·
·
Laura N.
Laura N.
·
·
Thank you for tagging this thread Maegan P.! I met with a rep from UserInterviews last week and it seemed very promising! Respondent.io has been generally decent quality for us as long as you’re very tricksy with the screener - I did have one liar slip through recently and it was an awkward waste of time. We use them for quick, ad-hoc studies as the maximum number of participants you can recruit for a project is 100 I believe?
Maegan P.
·
·
Great to hear! I hope it works out. Thanks for sharing your experience with Respondent
Emi F.
·
·
I've used UserInterviews on their pay-per-participant plan and it worked pretty well. Only had a few folks who probably should have been screened out.
🙏1