Insufficient effort responding (IER) presents a significant challenge in management research, potentially leading to flawed inferences. This review critically examines IER practices in 17 leading management journals from 2012 to 2023, highlighting inconsistencies in screening methods, cutoffs, and reporting. We find that IER screening is more prevalent in studies using online paid samples, experimental tasks, and computerized data collection. However, researchers’ IER-related practices, specifically the use of multiple detection methods, predicted IER removal rate above and beyond these study characteristics. Our review revealed that, despite increasing awareness, IER detection and reporting remain unstandardized, with varied practices across studies. While attention checks are frequently used, details about their implementation are often inadequately reported, and multiple detection methods, though recommended, are inconsistently applied. Variability in cutoffs and reliance on single-item checks raise concerns about the risk of retaining IER cases or mistakenly excluding attentive respondents. Our assessment of the impact of IER removal suggests that while it generally improves reliability and model fit, its effect can vary widely across measures and studies. We call on methodologists to resolve existing inconsistencies by developing clearer, empirically derived guidelines for IER detection and removal. We urge researchers to adopt more comprehensive and transparent reporting practices to enhance replicability and methodological rigor, with a flowchart to guide research design and method communication. This review underscores the need for a more systematic approach to IER mitigation in management research to enhance data quality and research validity.

中文翻译：

---

管理研究中应对努力不足：批判性综述和未来方向


努力响应不足 （IER） 在管理研究中提出了重大挑战，可能导致有缺陷的推断。本综述批判性地研究了 2012 年至 2023 年 17 种领先管理期刊的 IER 实践，强调了筛选方法、截止值和报告方面的不一致之处。我们发现 IER 筛查在使用在线付费样本、实验任务和计算机化数据收集的研究中更为普遍。然而，研究人员与 IER 相关的做法，特别是使用多种检测方法，预测了 IER 去除率高于这些研究特征。我们的综述显示，尽管意识不断提高，但 IER 检测和报告仍然未标准化，研究之间的做法各不相同。虽然经常使用注意力检查，但有关其实施的详细信息通常没有得到充分报告，并且尽管建议使用多种检测方法，但其应用并不一致。临界值的可变性和对单一项目检查的依赖引发了人们对保留 IER 案例或错误地排除细心受访者的风险的担忧。我们对 IER 去除影响的评估表明，虽然它通常会提高可靠性和模型拟合度，但其效果可能因测量和研究而异。我们呼吁方法学家通过制定更清晰、经验衍生的 IER 检测和去除指南来解决现有的不一致。我们敦促研究人员采用更全面和透明的报告实践，以提高可复制性和方法的严谨性，并用流程图来指导研究设计和方法交流。本综述强调了在管理研究中需要更系统地缓解 IER 的方法，以提高数据质量和研究有效性。