Skip to content

8 min read

The survey tool checklist for panel studies.

Check how a survey tool captures participant IDs, handles completion and screening exits, and keeps test submissions separate. This guide compares the setup involved in several common tools.

Seven capabilities to check

1. Automatic ID capture. The tool must read PROLIFIC_PID and study or session IDs from the link and save them with each response. Asking people to type an ID introduces errors that can make matching responses harder.

2. Completion redirect + visible code. Finish → bounce back to Prolific automatically, with the code printed on the thank-you screen as the manual fallback.

3. A separate screen-out exit. Different message, different code, different redirect for disqualified participants.

4. Duplicate blocking by participant ID. Check that the server blocks a second submission with the same participant ID, including attempts from another device.

5. Data-quality instrumentation. Look for attention checks, response timing, repeated-answer detection and exports that retain those flags.

6. Quotas and screening. Cap segments (e.g. 50 per condition per gender) and disqualify early, enforced server-side so concurrent participants cannot oversubscribe a cell.

7. A test mode. You will rehearse the study several times. Those rehearsals should never sit in your data.

How the common choices compare

The table compares the tools against that checklist, including features that need manual setup.

CapabilityQualtricsTypeformGoogle FormsPlumeform
ID captureYes, via embedded-data fields you configure per studyYes, via hidden fields you configure per formParticipants enter their ID manuallyAutomatic capture of link parameters
Completion redirectYes (end-of-survey element)Yes (redirect on completion, paid plans)NoYes, plus the code shown on screen
Screen-out exitYes, via branch logic you assemblePartial: logic jumps and a single redirectNoBuilt in: separate screen, code, redirect
Duplicate blocking by PIDConfigurable with effortNo (cookie-based only)NoOne toggle, enforced server-side
Attention checks & quality flagsChecks yes; flags via your own analysisNoNoChecks, speeders, straight-liners flagged automatically
QuotasYesNoNoYes, server-enforced
Test modePreview mode (separate from live data)NoNo?test=1: stored separately and removable in one click
Typical cost to a researcherInstitutional license (five to six figures) or you lose access when you leavePaid tiers per feature; research features thinFree$15/mo including the research controls

When choosing: Qualtrics is the incumbent for a reason — it can do nearly everything on the list if you invest in learning its flow editor and embedded-data plumbing, and if your institution pays for it, that knowledge transfers across labs. Typeform optimizes for marketing forms, not research; the gaps are structural. Google Forms is free and fine until the first time you lose an hour matching mistyped IDs. Plumeform's bet is that the whole checklist should be product defaults rather than configuration — judge that claim on the academic research page.

Questions to ask before you commit

Whatever you choose, run this gauntlet with a real pilot before the study that matters: Can you launch, complete, and approve a submission end to end without touching a spreadsheet? Does a screened-out participant exit cleanly? If you open the study link twice as the same participant, what happens? Where do your dry runs go? And — the one people forget — can you export every column you will need for your methods section: durations, quality flags, IDs, condition assignments?

Run the pilot before opening recruitment, while you can still fix the setup without affecting participants.

Quick answers

Does Prolific require a specific survey tool?
No. Prolific hands participants a link and expects a completion code back; anything that can capture URL parameters and show or redirect to a code works. The differences are in how much of the workflow the tool automates and how much you hand-roll.
Is Google Forms good enough for a Prolific study?
For a one-off pilot, maybe. It cannot capture the PROLIFIC_PID automatically (participants must paste their ID into a question, which they mistype), has no redirect, no screen-out handling, no attention checks, and no duplicate blocking. Every one of those becomes manual work or lost data.
My university has Qualtrics. Why would I use anything else?
If your license is paid for and you know the embedded-data workflow, Qualtrics is a fine, battle-tested choice. People leave it for two reasons: the workflow overhead (embedded data fields, flow editor, and query strings you must wire by hand for every study) and losing access when they leave the institution.
What about jsPsych, Gorilla, or other experiment builders?
Different category. If your study is a reaction-time task or needs millisecond stimulus control, use an experiment builder. If it is questions and scales — most panel studies — a survey tool with proper panel support is faster to build in and easier for participants.

Keep reading: Completion codes, set up right · Plumeform vs Qualtrics, feature by feature · Stopping duplicate participants

Start

Put it into practice.

Start with 100 responses a month free. Pro includes 10,000 responses and the advanced research controls described in these guides.