Can Fake IDs Fool Scanners? A Closer Look at Identity Verification in Survey Research

In today’s digital world, verifying that someone is who they claim to be has become more complicated than ever. This is true, certainly, in the world of online survey research, where fake respondents can distort data quality, drain incentives, and erode client trust. While most online survey panels do not even bother to check panelist IDs, some, like Survey Diem, do. The problem is that technology is making it possible to generate increasingly sophisticated fake identity documents. So how effective are these fakes, and can barcode scanners actually catch them?

How Fake IDs Work (and Why They’re a Problem)

Fake IDs have come a long way from the clumsy fakes of the early 2000s. Today, high-quality counterfeits often include barcodes, holograms, and state-specific visual elements. For market research, the threat isn’t underage drinkers — it’s fraudsters creating duplicate accounts or misrepresenting themselves to qualify for high-paying studies.

A typical U.S. driver’s license includes a PDF417 barcode on the back, which encodes information like name, date of birth, license number, issuing state, and expiration date. Good fakes can mimic the look of this data, but replicating the precise structure and logic of a state’s barcode encoding is much harder.

Moreover, fake ID production has scaled with access to breached personal data. Many forgeries now use legitimate names and addresses pulled from public or leaked databases. That means the fake ID may “look” valid and even match a real person — but it’s still fraud.

Do Scanners Catch Fake IDs?

The effectiveness of ID scanners varies widely depending on the technology being used.

• Basic scanners, like the ones used in bars or gas stations, often just read the barcode and display the encoded info. These are easy to fool if the barcode is syntactically correct.
• More advanced systems, like those used by law enforcement or financial institutions, analyze barcode structure, cross-check issuing state formats, and may even reference external databases.

At Survey Diem, we use Intellicheck, a leading ID authentication platform, to scan and validate IDs during panelist onboarding. Intellicheck is designed to detect fake ID patterns by analyzing barcode structure in real-time, identifying over 250 unique document formats used across North America (Greenway Solutions Report, 2023).

According to a third-party test by Greenway Solutions, Intellicheck correctly flagged 20 out of 20 fake driver’s licenses used in a red team test, outperforming both manual inspection and alternative document verification tools. The fakes used in the test were high quality and would likely pass most physical inspection methods, including bend tests and UV light. Intellicheck caught all of them using barcode scanning alone.

This level of accuracy — 100% in this test — is impressive, but it’s still important to note that no system can guarantee perfect results. Fraudsters are always adapting.

What About Real-Time State Verification?

An option that provides a high level of confidence is the Driver License Data Verification (DLDV) service offered by the American Association of Motor Vehicle Administrators (AAMVA). This system allows authorized organizations to verify the attributes on a driver’s license against official state records in real time. The result is a simple true/false response confirming whether the document data matches what the issuing authority has on file (AAMVA DLDV Overview).

While DLDV is used in government and some commercial settings, it comes with strict access requirements and doesn’t verify document authenticity or provide photo verification. More importantly, DLDV is ineffective in catching a fake license created using real data from a data breach. If a fraudster has access to accurate personal data — name, DOB, address, license number — a fake ID with those attributes may pass DLDV checks, even if the document itself is completely counterfeit.

This risk is especially relevant today, as massive data breaches continue to expose real identity information. In 2024 alone, the Change Healthcare ransomware attack affected over 100 million individuals, a breach at National Public Data exposed 2.9 billion records, and a Dell breach impacted 49 million customers.

What About Biometrics and Facial Matching?

Some platforms like CLEAR Verified or Veriff offer biometric-based identity verification, using selfie videos and liveness detection to match users to their ID photos. This technology is incredibly useful for stopping fraud based on borrowed or stolen IDs.

CLEAR, for example, allows users to create a reusable digital identity that can be verified across platforms. This can help confirm not just that an ID is real, but that the person holding it actually matches the face on the card. However, these solutions also require more user participation, device access, and often introduce friction into the sign-up process.

We’ve seen that fraudsters often abandon onboarding when faced with a selfie or liveness check — a promising indicator of fraud deterrence. Still, this friction also risks deterring legitimate users, especially in lower-risk studies.

For now, Survey Diem has chosen to focus on seamless but secure onboarding, and biometric solutions aren’t yet part of our workflow. But we're actively exploring options that balance security with user experience.

The Role of Device and Network Intelligence

Beyond ID scanning, another key line of defense is looking at how someone is connecting. Survey Diem blocks the use of VPNs, proxies, and anonymizing tools. We also use device fingerprinting to detect when the same machine is being used to submit multiple responses, even if the identity changes.

We also monitor behavior over time. Repeated inconsistencies in location, response patterns, or device use can flag accounts for review or removal.

Why We’re Exploring Address Validation

Another tool we're currently investigating is address validation. The idea here is simple: cross-check the address submitted by a panelist with national databases to ensure it's real and deliverable. Some providers even offer tools that link names and addresses to public records, or flag high-risk address types like mail drops or commercial forwarding services.

However, validation has its limits — especially in a post-data breach era. When real addresses tied to real people are available on the black market, validation checks alone can't guarantee the person submitting the address actually lives there. In reality, the only way to fully verify an address is to send physical mail to it and confirm that the recipient responds or takes a specific action.

Physical mail verification increases onboarding costs by at least 10% — a meaningful margin in large-scale operations. While not always scalable, it may be worthwhile for high-value respondents or incentive distribution.

Can Anyone Catch 100% of Fake IDs?

In theory? Maybe. In practice? Probably not.

One emerging concept is layered trust scoring — where different verification methods contribute to a composite risk profile. A panelist might not need a selfie if their ID passes a rigorous barcode scan, their IP is residential and consistent, their device is clean, and their address checks out. But if one of those layers fails, we can escalate to a higher-friction step.

This mirrors the approach used in financial fraud prevention — and it may be where the research industry is headed.

Where Survey Diem Stands

We’re proud of the identity verification systems we have in place today. Tools like Intellicheck give us a strong foundation.

But we’re not done. As fraudsters evolve, so must we.

While we may never eliminate fraud completely in online surveys, we will always strive to — and continue to make investments toward that goal.

The future of research depends on knowing who you’re really talking to. And at Survey Diem, we take that responsibility seriously.

Want to learn more about how we’re fighting fraud? Get in touch with us here.

Is ChatGPT ESOMAR 37’s Friend or Foe?

Intro to the ESOMAR 37

ESOMAR is the major industry organization for market research around the globe. They have a very helpful questionnaire called the “37 questions to help buyers of online sample.” I prefer to call it the “ESOMAR 37.”

Many sample providers have chosen to produce a document that has their answers to all 37 questions and which ESOMAR posts on this website. Most of the reports are 15-20 page PDFs. The idea is that if you are shopping for online survey sample, you can read all the reports on the site or choose among the companies in which you are interested and understand the panels’ various strengths and weaknesses.

While it’s not difficult to read any individual company’s report, it is tedious to go through multiple reports and retain enough information to make a decision about who to work with. Furthermore, panels provide vague answers to some questions, making the whole experience feel a bit like mattress shopping. It would be great to have a smart friend help you quickly understand which companies do x, y, and z so you can move on with your busy day. This is where ChatGPT comes in.

The Big Question

Can you actually rely on ChatGPT to examine the contents of the ESOMAR 37 reports? The answer, as we’ll see, is “not really,” because you can get very different recommendations or answers to questions depending on how you phrase your prompt, which model you use, how you format the source files, and whether you toggle on the Deep Research tool. In short, you have to make a lot of decisions, and they’re all important, though if you play with ChatGPT enough, you can start to understand why certain panels were recommended in certain circumstances and you learn something about the panels along the way.

So, yeah, it’s not great to ask ChatGPT a question like “which panel has the best data quality?” However, you can use it to create a handy table that summarizes key features of each panel’s quality assurance protocol. I think this approach is more reliable, and I provide an example a little further down the page.

Methodology

I was able to get 52 ESOMAR 37 reports in a txt file format. This was a chore in itself, involving some python script that, surprise (!), ChatGPT wrote for me.

The following companies were not considered for the reasons provided.

Report Not Included	Reason Report Not Included
Data Diggers	Broken link from ESOMAR Website
iMad Research	File requested but not delivered
Online Market Intelligence	No US presence
Probe Partners	ESOMAR answers not found
SSRS	ESOMAR answers not found

Here is the complete list of companies covered by the 52 reports.

1.      AFROEYE Research

2.      AYTM

3.      Bilendi

4.      Borderless Access

5.      DataSpring

6.      Dynata

7.      EMI Research Solutions

8.      Eno Research

9.      e-Research-Global

10.  ERT (Easy Reach Technologies)

11.  Cint

12.  Ipsos

13.  EMPanel

14.  Ronin International

15.  Frequent Research

16.  Full Circle Research

17.  GlobalSurvey

18.  GMO Research

19.  HBG (High Beam Global)

20.  IAPAC

21.  InfoAudienceResearch

22.  Insights Opinion

23.  Internet Research Bureau (IRB)

24.  Kaaya Research

25.  Kantar

26.  Logit Group

27.  M3 Global Research

28.  Macromill Southeast Asia

29.  Markelytics

30.  Netquest

31.  Nomadic Insights

32.  Norstat

33.  Ola Surveys/Survey Diem

34.  PMI Research

35.  Probity Research

36.  Prodege

37.  Prolific

38.  Pureprofile

39.  QRS Research

40.  Quest Mindshare

41.  Rep Data

42.  Rise2Research

43.  Robas Research

44.  Sample Junction

45.  Savanta

46.  SurveyMonkey

47.  Symmetric Research

48.  Syno International

49.  Talk Online Panel

50.  TNB Global Survey

51.  Toluna

52.  YouGov

Refining the List

I attempted to exclude companies that do not offer a US consumer panel. At first, I used the following prompt in ChatGPT 40.

“Which of these companies operate a US consumer survey panel?”

The answer included only 15 of the 52, which I know is not right. You can ask ChatGPT to try again and get different results, but I wasn’t confident in any of its answers to this question.

I scrapped the idea of filtering out companies that do not operate a consumer panel in the US, since I could always check that myself from the final list of companies I wanted to examine more closely.

Asking for a Recommendation

Next, I directed ChatGPT 40 to read my last blog post, which outlined the pros and cons of various identity verification methods. My goal was to teach ChatGPT which methods are better than others and from that, evaluate who does the best job ensuring this component of data quality.

"Here is a blog post I wrote about ways panel companies can prevent survey fraud: https://www.surveydiem.com/blog/how-to-prevent-survey-fraud Please read the blog post and consider the information as it relates to the best ways to validate panelists’ identities. Which companies do the best job ensuring that panelists are who they say they are?"

The five companies ChatGPT listed were M3, Kantar, Nomadic Insights, SurveyMonkey, and Prolific. I think this is a reasonable answer to the question, though it does exclude the Survey Diem panel, which I designed based around ID verification. Two interesting things may be happening here: a) my blog post didn’t take enough of a stand in promoting id verification as an essential process and b) my ESOMAR 37 report isn’t optimized for being included in an answer to this question.

Note: when I ran this analysis using pdf files instead of txt files, I got a different answer. Furthermore, when I analyzed the txt files using the Deep Research tool with ChatGPT 40, I was gratified to see Survey Diem as a top recommendation. The difference? The Deep Research tool used python occasionally for the analysis and reviewed other resources such as the Survey Diem website.

So yeah, I can craft an analysis that shows Survey Diem is the best, but the average sample buyer isn’t going to structure their search the same way.

Sticking to the “Facts”

I decided to take an alternative approach where I felt ChatGPT could perform better, which is to simply summarize what each company does for ID verification. Here’s the prompt I used:

“Summarize in a chart what each panel does for identity verification. Include columns specifically related to what the process is, when the verification happens, and whether it applies to all panel members. This information is often included in question 7 of the ESOMAR reports ("What form of validation do you use in recruitment to ensure that participants are real, unique, and are who they say they are? Describe this both in terms of the practical steps you take within your own organisation and the technologies you are using. Please try to be as specific and quantify as much as you can.")”

The prompt resulted in a table of just 12 panels out of the 52 examined. I asked ChatGPT why it only included 12 panels, and it ran the analysis again, this time resulting in 50 panels. I’m not sure why it didn’t do this the first time.

Here are the results. Thirteen panels are credited as having some form of ID verification beyond just email verification or phone validation. I am including the panel names because I want to give credit where credit is due. Kudos to these panels. I did not include the columns for when verification happens and to whom it applies because the model did not really make any distinctions among the panels. Regrettably, these 13 panels almost certainly make up less than 25 percent of survey panel revenue for the industry overall.

Panel	Verification Process
GMO Research & AI	AI fraud detection, email validation, CAPTCHA, identity verification via external databases
M3 Global Research	Medical ID verification for healthcare panelists, CAPTCHA, digital fingerprinting
Macromill Southeast Asia	SMS or email verification, ID card submission, CAPTCHA
Ola Surveys (Survey Diem)	Driver's license or ID card scan, VPN detection, device fingerprinting
Prolific	Identity verification using ID scans, AI fraud detection, CAPTCHA
RONIN International	Digital fingerprinting, CAPTCHA, ID verification for high-value respondents
Sample Junction	Device forensic API, Geo-IP checks, CAPTCHA, fraud scoring, unique ID validation
Savanta	Imperium RegGuard fraud detection, relevant ID system, periodic quality checks
Symmetric	Triple opt-in (email validation, follow-up survey, open-end verification), LinkedIn verification for B2B
EMpanel	AI-based fraud prevention, CAPTCHA, manual identity verification
Markelytics	Triple opt-in, CAPTCHA, behavioral fraud detection, address verification
Nomadic Insights	Manual review of new registrations, Research Defender fraud detection, IP validation
Probity Research	Digital fingerprinting, CAPTCHA, address verification, identity scoring

As for the rest, I thought I’d show what ChatGPT says the ESOMAR 37 reports say these companies do. Because ChatGPT could be wrong, I have removed the names of the panels. I don’t want to say panel x doesn’t do y and be wrong about it. (And no, the panels are not in alphabetical order in this table!)

Panel	Verification Process
Panel 1	Double opt-in verification, CAPTCHA, digital fingerprinting, phone number validation
Panel 2	Geo-IP checks, CAPTCHA, unique ID assignment, profile reviews, T-Sign technology
Panel 3	Email and phone verification, IP address tracking, behavior analysis
Panel 4	Digital fingerprinting, behavioral analysis, email authentication, CAPTCHA
Panel 5	IP tracking, browser fingerprinting, CAPTCHA, manual fraud checks
Panel 6	Email validation, CAPTCHA, digital fingerprinting, behavioral screening
Panel 7	Mobile phone verification, CAPTCHA, email authentication, behavioral tracking
Panel 8	Two-step authentication, digital fingerprinting, behavioral analysis
Panel 9	Biometric authentication, CAPTCHA, device fingerprinting, AI-driven identity verification
Panel 10	Digital fingerprinting, IP validation, CAPTCHA, identity verification via email
Panel 11	Double opt-in, CAPTCHA, behavioral tracking, digital fingerprinting
Panel 12	Triple opt-in, CAPTCHA, deduplication system, anti-bot measures, location tracking
Panel 13	Email verification, phone number validation, digital fingerprinting, CAPTCHA
Panel 14	IP checks, digital fingerprinting, email verification, AI-based fraud detection
Panel 15	Multi-step verification process, phone number confirmation, CAPTCHA
Panel 16	Email verification, device fingerprinting, manual review of suspicious activity
Panel 17	Two-factor authentication, device fingerprinting, automated fraud detection
Panel 18	Email validation, CAPTCHA, duplicate checks, IP and geolocation tracking
Panel 19	Mobile verification, CAPTCHA, IP address validation, duplicate email detection
Panel 20	Email and mobile verification, CAPTCHA, AI-driven fraud checks
Panel 21	Digital fingerprinting, text analytics, respondent-level tracking, hidden bot-detection text
Panel 22	Business email validation for B2B panelists, CAPTCHA, behavioral analysis
Panel 23	Mobile verification, CAPTCHA, digital fingerprinting, cross-checking for duplicate emails
Panel 24	Machine learning fraud detection, email and phone verification, IP validation
Panel 25	Two-step authentication, device fingerprinting, fraud detection via AI
Panel 26	Double opt-in, email and phone verification, CAPTCHA, digital fingerprinting
Panel 27	Device fingerprinting, CAPTCHA, email and phone verification, quality scoring
Panel 28	Fraud detection algorithms, duplicate detection, CAPTCHA
Panel 29	Triple-opt-in verification, biometric verification, blockchain data integrity, AI-powered screening
Panel 30	Two-step verification, CAPTCHA, device fingerprinting, survey response analysis
Panel 31	Identity verification through LinkedIn, CAPTCHA, behavioral tracking
Panel 32	Email and phone verification, AI-based fraud detection, CAPTCHA
Panel 33	Double opt-in, automatic de-duplication, quality score assignment, anomaly detection
Panel 34	Mobile number verification, CAPTCHA, digital fingerprinting, manual quality checks
Panel 35	AI-driven identity checks, CAPTCHA, IP tracking, manual fraud screening
Panel 36	Geo-IP validation, CAPTCHA, duplicate detection, biometric analysis
Panel 37	Double opt-in email confirmation, Geo-IP validation, anomaly detection, duplicate email/contact detection

Conclusion

ChatGPT can be good at summarizing content but sometimes needs corrective prompts (e.g., “Are you sure there are only 30 companies? I uploaded 52 files…) for basic errors and can struggle making judgments and recommendations, even with some prompting with a framework or value system. I worry about how a sample buyer might use an LLM to evaluate websites and other documents like the ESOMAR 37 reports. My recommendation to such shoppers is to stick to questions with verifiable answers and avoid making decisions solely on LLM recommendations or at least ask your questions a few different ways and see how results change. Know also that the model you use will affect results.

I find it fun to play around with ChatGPT and see what it can do. I would say at this point, if you’re using it as a shopping filter, just be a little skeptical of its recommendations. Happy researching and happy shopping.  

How to Prevent Survey Fraud

The point of a survey is to understand the experiences and opinions of the members of a group by asking questions of a representative subset of these people. Surveys can only achieve this goal if those completing the survey are honest about who they are, or if there is a technical way to make lying impossible.

Survey fraud is unfortunately rampant in the market research industry. Surveys these days are typically administered online to “panel members” (people who have signed up to take surveys for money) and there is almost always a financial incentive attached—a quite large one for “B2B” surveys, i.e., surveys about a particular job. A survey targeting cardiologists, for example, could pay $200 for ten minutes of effort. If you are a member of a survey panel, and a survey starts by asking whether you are a cardiologist or whether you have purchased a sports car in the last month, well, you might be tempted to say “yes” even if it’s not true. This happens sometimes, and the impact on research quality is tremendous.

So, what can researchers do? The following is a list of ways to prevent survey fraud. For the most part, these techniques focus on whether a respondent is who they say they are at least in terms of some essential criteria. As to whether respondents are honest about their experiences and opinions, able to remember past events in sufficient detail, or are misled by imperfect survey questions, that is a topic for another day.

Unfortunately, many panel companies also use vague language to suggest a level of rigor in validating respondents’ identities that doesn’t exist. It is likely that every major survey panel operating in the US would say that they validate panelists’ identities (just look at their websites!). The details of what they actually do, however, are essential to understand.

Consider the following a checklist. Does your panel company offer any of the following?

Survey Fraud Prevention Checklist

o   Online activity tracking

o   GPS location tracking

o   Government-issued ID verification

o   ID verification before panel registration

o   ID verification after panel registration

o   LinkedIn profile review

o   VPN blocking

o   Face scanning

o   Digital fingerprinting

o   Facebook or Google sign-on

Online activity tracking – Some panels’ survey apps ask users for permission to track their activity on other apps on their phone. This allows panels to see, for example, whether certain panelists visited nike.com or saw an ad about shampoo or use TikTok frequently. As a result, the panels can target members precisely for related surveys. Want to survey people that you know saw your shampoo ad? No problem.

Pros: Hard to cheat. Your internet activity is what it is. Panelists can get paid simply for sharing their data.

Cons: Many panel members do not want their activity data tracked and will not allow it, even if they get paid a modest amount.

GPS location tracking (different from IP address tracking) – Like activity tracking, this involves allowing an app to track the location of your phone using GPS. Again, you can target panelists for surveys precisely. I.e., I know you went to Wegman’s yesterday. Here’s a survey about your experience.

Pros: Hard to cheat. Panelists can get paid more for qualifying for so-called low incidence surveys.

Cons: A lot of people find location tracking creepy and will not enable this feature. You might, for example, have just twenty percent of your panel available as a baseline for these types of surveys.

Government-issued ID verification – Some panels, like Survey Diem, require panelists to verify their identity by scanning their driver’s license or state-issued ID card. The goal typically is to confirm their location in broad terms (they are located in the US) and prevent one person for signing up for multiple panel accounts.

Pros: Good ID verification services can spot fake IDs.

Cons: This approach can feel invasive. Panels need to reassure people that their name and address are not being sold or hacked.

ID verification before panel registration – Survey Diem requires an ID to be scanned before a user of the Survey Diem app can register for the panel.

Pros: Gets this step out of the way and ensures that all survey respondents have been ID verified.

Cons: Can feel like a barrier to panel registration.

ID verification after panel registration – Some panels wait to verify IDs until the panelist has completed some surveys and wants to redeem their incentives. Other panels reserve the right to verify IDs if they suspect someone is not providing honest data. This latter approach is very common!

Pros: Limits the barrier to panel registration that ID verification presents.

Cons: Many survey respondents will never have their ID actually verified, especially now that it’s getting harder to spot fraudsters.

LinkedIn profile review – Some panels allow you to register by linking to your LinkedIn account. The theory is that fraudsters are not likely to go through the trouble of creating one or more fake LinkedIn accounts. A good B2B panel will also review panelists’ LinkedIn profiles to find the best fits for a study. In other words, they won’t just ask in the survey whether you’re a cardiologist. They’ll already know that you’re a cardiologist from your LinkedIn profile.

Pros: This is an essential step for B2B surveys. I think it’s true that fraudsters are not likely to create fake LinkedIn pages.

Cons: You never know. Anyone can create a LinkedIn profile or several if they really want to.

VPN blocking – A lot of fraudsters taking US surveys are not actually in the US. Most or all survey administration platforms track respondents’ IP addresses, so it’s quite easy to remove bad responses based on IP address. The catch is that it’s easy to use a VPN connection to give you a fake US-based IP address. Fortunately, the most common VPN providers are known and can also be blocked.

Pros: Common VPN providers are known and can be blocked. If you limit a survey to US IP addresses and block VPNs, you are going to cut a lot of the fraud that currently happens.

Cons: VPN providers are getting more sophisticated too. It’s a game of cat and mouse. You can try to block VPNs but can’t guarantee you are doing so 100% of the time.

Face scanning – Technology has developed to such an extent that you can scan and store data about a survey taker’s face at a not-totally-unreasonable cost. The idea is that by scanning someone’s face you can guarantee that a real person is taking the survey (and not a bot) and check to see if that person is taking your survey multiple times.

Pros: Guarantees that a real person is taking your survey.

Cons: This is fairly invasive and doesn’t preclude someone abroad from taking US surveys. Should be used in conjunction with other fraud prevention approaches.

Digital fingerprinting and database reference – A digital fingerprint is a string of characters that is intended to be unique to each digital device used to take surveys. Note that your iPhone doesn’t have an actual number embedded in it called a “digital fingerprint.” A digital fingerprint is made up based on your phone’s model, browser installation, and a variety of other features. There are several databases of digital fingerprints that researchers can use to screen out known bad actors.

Pros: It’s easy to assign a device a digital fingerprint and track survey-taking activities on that device.

Cons: There is no comprehensive digital fingerprint database for the market research industry. I suggest that there should be, but that’s an uphill battle. You can also have someone buy ten iPhones and create ten panel accounts.

Facebook or Google sign-on – It is common for panels to allow people to register by signing into their Facebook or Google account.

Pros: I guess it’s better than nothing.

Cons: It’s easy to create multiple Facebook or Google accounts. I’m not a fraudster and I have five Google accounts I could use to register for the same panel five times. Why do I have five Google accounts? Email info@surveydiem.com or info@olasurveys.com and I’ll tell you.

In the survey: Trap questions – Savvy researchers know to include trap questions in their surveys. At my old company, we used to include a fake brand in the answer options for surveys, knowing that if someone says they have used the brand, they’re either lying or not paying attention. There are many fun and clever questions you can ask to try to catch people in a lie. Just don’t get too clever and boot everyone from your survey.

Pros: It’s easy to add these questions to any survey.

Cons: Fraudsters are getting smarter, and when they use AI agents to take surveys, the AI is smarter still. Again, there is a never-ending game of cat and mouse.

Other things – I’m sure I’ve missed some things (e.g., speed traps, mobile-only surveys, app-based surveys, hashed survey links), but this post is already long.

Have questions? We’re happy to hear from you. Hit us up at info@surveydiem.com.

Welcome to Survey Diem! Know Your Rights.

Thank you for your interest in Survey Diem!

It’s 2025, and everyone in the market research industry seems to agree on the following:  

1.       We need to make the experience better for panel survey participants.

2.       We need to be able to guarantee that all respondents for consumer surveys are real consumers in that market so our client gets a representative sample.

We built Survey Diem from the ground up to focus on these two things. We ID-verify every panelist at the time of registration and ban VPN access to make sure all panel members are in the US. We are also always thinking of how to improve members’ experiences. We hope ours are among the highest paying surveys, and we seek to create as many opportunities for you to participate in paid research studies as possible while balancing data quality considerations.

When it comes to the survey-taking experience, we fully support the Insights Association’s Participant Bill of Rights. While these are not legal protections, they serve as important industry standards that guide how panel companies like Survey Diem protect and show respect for their members’ interests. In fact, we like the standards so much, we have pasted them below and added comments to make it clear how we support each one. For more information, visit the Insights Association’s Participant Bill of Rights webpage or email us at info@surveydiem.com.

Research Participant Bill of Rights

As a participant in a market research study, we believe you have the following rights:

1. I have the right to know the research study's general purpose, what I will do, how often, and for how long.

When a survey becomes available to you in the Survey Diem app, we will always tell you how long we believe the survey will take, on average, to complete, and we will always tell you how much the reward is for completing the survey. For additional information, you may contact info@surveydiem.com, though we cannot tell you in advance what the survey is about. Many surveys include screening questions to make sure you are in the target population for the project.

2. I have the right to communication that is easy to read and understand.

We hope all documentation we provide on this website and in our app is clear and easy to understand. We always welcome feedback!

3. I have the right to know how to contact the company that invited me to the research study. 

When you use our app, the company inviting you to the study is Survey Diem. You can always reach us at info@surveydiem.com. As for the company paying for the survey (i.e., who the data is for), that information must often remain confidential.  

4. I have the right to be free from harassment or intimidation to join or continue in a research study. 

We will never harass or intimidate you into taking a survey. When you are invited to participate in a survey, we simply make the link available to you to complete in the app. It is 100% up to you whether you participate in the survey before the opportunity expires. You will always know exactly what the reward is for completing the survey.

5. I have the right to know how I can leave a study at any time.

Leaving a study is easy in the Survey Diem app. Just close the app or navigate back to the home screen. If you start a survey but do not complete it, you will not receive the incentive. If you start the survey and are disqualified by the screening questions, you will receive 10 points, equivalent to $0.10.

6. I have the right to request that my personal information be removed from the database of the company that invited me to the study and to not be contacted again.

You can delete your Survey Diem account and all of your data at any time by going to Settings in the app and selecting “Delete Account.” Only active panel members and app wait list members are contacted by Survey Diem.

7. I have the right to be treated with dignity and respect before, during, and after the research study.

Absolutely. If you experience any issues with a survey’s content or your survey-taking experience, let us know at info@surveydiem.com. We treat our panel members and clients with dignity and respect at all times. We want you to always have the best experience.

8. I have the right to be in a study that is free from discrimination. This includes race, ethnicity, sexual orientation, gender identity, disability, age, national origin, religion, or status as a protected veteran.

If you experience any issues with a survey’s content or your survey-taking experience, let us know at info@surveydiem.com.

9. I have the right to know if reasonable accommodations are available for persons with disabilities.

You may always inquire about survey accommodations by contacting us at info@surveydiem.com.

10. I have the right to know if I will receive an incentive for my time, in what form, its value, how, and when I will receive it. 

When a survey is posted to the app, we will tell you what the incentive amount is for completing the survey. You will receive credit in “points” for completing a survey (or being screened out) as soon as you complete the survey. You may transfer your points to PayPal dollars at any time you wish. Note that if Survey Diem’s client contests the validity of your survey response, your incentive points may be deducted.  

11. I have the right to not be sold anything or asked for money as part of a research study.

Survey Diem’s surveys are only intended to learn your consumer insights. You should never be asked for money or to purchase a product or service as part of any survey you complete in the Survey Diem app. If you feel this right has been violated, please let us know immediately.

12. I have the right to be told about any risks that might happen as a result of participating in research.

Survey Diem will always work with our clients to ensure that appropriate warnings are provided during a survey if we (Survey Diem and the client) believe there is a risk of harm to you in answering our market research questions. Generally, however, we do not allow survey questions that present this type of risk, and you can never be identified personally as a respondent and tied to your survey data unless you explicitly agree to discuss your responses with a client.

13. I have the right to confidentially share my experience in the research study with the company that invited me to the research study.

You have an opportunity to rate every Survey Diem survey at the completion of a survey. Your ratings are always kept confidential by Survey Diem and are used only to improve the experience of participants in future surveys.

14. I have the right to request and receive the privacy policy of the company that invited me to the study.

Survey Diem’s privacy policy is always available at surveydiem.com/privacy-policy.

15. I have the right to know if a data breach exposed my personal information. This is governed by the state law where the company that invited me to the study is based.

Survey Diem will inform all members affected by a data breach immediately in accordance with our member Terms and Conditions.

16. I have the right to ask for and receive a printed or electronic copy of these rights.

You can download the latest version of the Insight Association’s Participant Bill of Rights here. Survey Diem can also print and mail a copy to you at your request. Just let us know at info@surveydiem.com.

Tags: