Microworkers vs. facebook: The impact of crowdsourcing platform choice on experimental results

B. Gardlo, M. Ries, T. Hossfeld, R. Schatz
{"title":"Microworkers vs. facebook: The impact of crowdsourcing platform choice on experimental results","authors":"B. Gardlo, M. Ries, T. Hossfeld, R. Schatz","doi":"10.1109/QoMEX.2012.6263885","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Subjective laboratory tests represent a proven, reliable approach towards multimedia quality assessment. Nonetheless, in certain cases novel progressive quality of experience (QoE) assessment methods can lead to better results or enable test execution in more cost-effective ways. In this respect, crowdsourcing can be considered as emerging method enabling researchers to better explore end-user quality perception when requiring a large panel of subjects, particularly for Web application usage scenarios. However, the crowdsourcing platform chosen for recruiting participants can have an impact on the experimental results. In this paper, we examine the platform's influence on QoE results by comparing MOS scores of two otherwise identical subjective HD video quality experiments executed on one paid and one non-paid crowdsourcing platform.","PeriodicalId":6303,"journal":{"name":"2012 Fourth International Workshop on Quality of Multimedia Experience","volume":"95 1","pages":"35-36"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2012-07-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"20","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"2012 Fourth International Workshop on Quality of Multimedia Experience","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1109/QoMEX.2012.6263885","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 20

Abstract

Subjective laboratory tests represent a proven, reliable approach towards multimedia quality assessment. Nonetheless, in certain cases novel progressive quality of experience (QoE) assessment methods can lead to better results or enable test execution in more cost-effective ways. In this respect, crowdsourcing can be considered as emerging method enabling researchers to better explore end-user quality perception when requiring a large panel of subjects, particularly for Web application usage scenarios. However, the crowdsourcing platform chosen for recruiting participants can have an impact on the experimental results. In this paper, we examine the platform's influence on QoE results by comparing MOS scores of two otherwise identical subjective HD video quality experiments executed on one paid and one non-paid crowdsourcing platform.
微工vs. facebook:众包平台选择对实验结果的影响
主观实验室测试是评估多媒体质量的可靠方法。尽管如此,在某些情况下,新颖的渐进式经验质量(QoE)评估方法可以产生更好的结果,或者以更具成本效益的方式执行测试。在这方面,众包可以被认为是一种新兴的方法,它使研究人员能够在需要大量主题时更好地探索最终用户的质量感知,特别是在Web应用程序使用场景中。然而,选择招募参与者的众包平台会对实验结果产生影响。在本文中,我们通过比较在一个付费和一个非付费众包平台上进行的两个完全相同的主观高清视频质量实验的MOS分数,来检验平台对QoE结果的影响。
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