Longitudinal Loyalty: Understanding The Barriers To Running Longitudinal Studies On Crowdsourcing Platforms

Michael Soprano, Kevin Roitero, U. Gadiraju, Eddy Maddalena, Gianluca Demartini
{"title":"Longitudinal Loyalty: Understanding The Barriers To Running Longitudinal Studies On Crowdsourcing Platforms","authors":"Michael Soprano, Kevin Roitero, U. Gadiraju, Eddy Maddalena, Gianluca Demartini","doi":"10.1145/3674884","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n Crowdsourcing tasks have been widely used to collect a large number of human labels at scale. While some of these tasks are deployed by requesters and performed only once by crowd workers, others require the same worker to perform the same task or a variant of it more than once, thus participating in a so-called\n longitudinal study\n . Despite the prevalence of longitudinal studies in crowdsourcing, there is a limited understanding of factors that influence worker participation in them across different crowdsourcing marketplaces. We present results from a large-scale survey of 300 workers on 3 different micro-task crowdsourcing platforms: Amazon Mechanical Turk, Prolific and Toloka. The aim is to understand how longitudinal studies are performed using crowdsourcing. We collect answers about 547 experiences and we analyze them both quantitatively and qualitatively. We synthesize 17 take-home messages about longitudinal studies together with 8 recommendations for task requesters and 5 best practices for crowdsourcing platforms to adequately conduct and support such kinds of studies. We release the survey and the data at: https://osf.io/h4du9/.\n","PeriodicalId":486759,"journal":{"name":"ACM transactions on social computing","volume":"138 25","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"ACM transactions on social computing","FirstCategoryId":"0","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1145/3674884","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Crowdsourcing tasks have been widely used to collect a large number of human labels at scale. While some of these tasks are deployed by requesters and performed only once by crowd workers, others require the same worker to perform the same task or a variant of it more than once, thus participating in a so-called longitudinal study . Despite the prevalence of longitudinal studies in crowdsourcing, there is a limited understanding of factors that influence worker participation in them across different crowdsourcing marketplaces. We present results from a large-scale survey of 300 workers on 3 different micro-task crowdsourcing platforms: Amazon Mechanical Turk, Prolific and Toloka. The aim is to understand how longitudinal studies are performed using crowdsourcing. We collect answers about 547 experiences and we analyze them both quantitatively and qualitatively. We synthesize 17 take-home messages about longitudinal studies together with 8 recommendations for task requesters and 5 best practices for crowdsourcing platforms to adequately conduct and support such kinds of studies. We release the survey and the data at: https://osf.io/h4du9/.
纵向忠诚度:了解在众包平台上开展纵向研究的障碍
众包任务已被广泛用于大规模收集大量人类标签。其中一些任务由请求者部署,众包工作者只执行一次,而另一些任务则要求同一工作者多次执行同一任务或其变体,从而参与所谓的纵向研究。尽管纵向研究在众包领域非常普遍,但人们对不同众包市场中影响工人参与纵向研究的因素了解有限。我们在 3 个不同的微任务众包平台上对 300 名工人进行了大规模调查,结果如下:亚马逊 Mechanical Turk、Prolific 和 Toloka。目的是了解如何利用众包进行纵向研究。我们收集了 547 项经验的答案,并对其进行了定量和定性分析。我们总结了 17 条关于纵向研究的启示,以及 8 条针对任务请求者的建议和 5 条针对众包平台的最佳实践,以充分开展和支持此类研究。我们在以下网址发布了调查报告和数据:https://osf.io/h4du9/。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信