生命历程:拓宽众包研究范围的跨学科框架

A. Margaryan
{"title":"生命历程:拓宽众包研究范围的跨学科框架","authors":"A. Margaryan","doi":"10.15346/HC.V8I1.124","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This paper reports outcomes of a systematic scoping review of methodological approaches and analytical lenses used in empirical research on crowdwork. Over the past decade a growing corpus of publications spanning Social Sciences and Computer Science/HCI have empirically examined the nature of work practices and tasks within crowdwork; surfaced key individual and environmental factors underpinning workers’ decisions to engage in this form of work; developed and implemented tools to improve and extend various aspects of crowdwork, such as the design and allocation of tasks and incentives or workflows within the platforms; and contributed new techniques and know-how on data collection within crowdwork, for example, how to conduct large-scale surveys and experiments in behavioural psychology, economics or education drawing on crowdworker samples. Our initial reading of the crowdwork literature suggested that research had relied on a limited set of relatively narrow methodological approaches, mostly online experiments, surveys and interviews. Importantly, crowdwork research has tended to examine workers’ experiences as snapshots in time rather than studying these longitudinally or contextualising them historically, environmentally and developmentally. This piece-meal approach has given the research community initial descriptions and interpretations of crowdwork practices and provided an important starting point in a nascent field of study. However, the depth of research in the various areas, and the missing pieces, have yet to be systematically scoped out. Therefore, this paper systematically reviews the analytical-methodological approaches used in crowdwork research identifying gaps in these approaches. We argue that to take crowdwork research to the next level it is essential to examine crowdwork practices within the context of both individual and historical-environmental factors impacting it. To this end, methodological approaches that bridge sociological, psychological, individual, collective, online, offline, and temporal processes and practices of crowdwork are needed. The paper proposes the Life Course perspective as an interdisciplinary framework that can help address these gaps and advance research on crowdwork. The paper concludes by proposing a set of Life Course-inspired research questions to guide future studies of crowdwork.","PeriodicalId":92785,"journal":{"name":"Human computation (Fairfax, Va.)","volume":"28 1","pages":"43-75"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-05-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The Life Course: An interdisciplinary framework for broadening the scope of research on crowdwork\",\"authors\":\"A. Margaryan\",\"doi\":\"10.15346/HC.V8I1.124\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"This paper reports outcomes of a systematic scoping review of methodological approaches and analytical lenses used in empirical research on crowdwork. Over the past decade a growing corpus of publications spanning Social Sciences and Computer Science/HCI have empirically examined the nature of work practices and tasks within crowdwork; surfaced key individual and environmental factors underpinning workers’ decisions to engage in this form of work; developed and implemented tools to improve and extend various aspects of crowdwork, such as the design and allocation of tasks and incentives or workflows within the platforms; and contributed new techniques and know-how on data collection within crowdwork, for example, how to conduct large-scale surveys and experiments in behavioural psychology, economics or education drawing on crowdworker samples. Our initial reading of the crowdwork literature suggested that research had relied on a limited set of relatively narrow methodological approaches, mostly online experiments, surveys and interviews. Importantly, crowdwork research has tended to examine workers’ experiences as snapshots in time rather than studying these longitudinally or contextualising them historically, environmentally and developmentally. This piece-meal approach has given the research community initial descriptions and interpretations of crowdwork practices and provided an important starting point in a nascent field of study. However, the depth of research in the various areas, and the missing pieces, have yet to be systematically scoped out. Therefore, this paper systematically reviews the analytical-methodological approaches used in crowdwork research identifying gaps in these approaches. We argue that to take crowdwork research to the next level it is essential to examine crowdwork practices within the context of both individual and historical-environmental factors impacting it. To this end, methodological approaches that bridge sociological, psychological, individual, collective, online, offline, and temporal processes and practices of crowdwork are needed. The paper proposes the Life Course perspective as an interdisciplinary framework that can help address these gaps and advance research on crowdwork. The paper concludes by proposing a set of Life Course-inspired research questions to guide future studies of crowdwork.\",\"PeriodicalId\":92785,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Human computation (Fairfax, Va.)\",\"volume\":\"28 1\",\"pages\":\"43-75\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-05-19\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Human computation (Fairfax, Va.)\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.15346/HC.V8I1.124\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Human computation (Fairfax, Va.)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.15346/HC.V8I1.124","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

本文报告了对众包实证研究中使用的方法方法和分析镜头进行系统范围审查的结果。在过去的十年中,越来越多的出版物跨越社会科学和计算机科学/HCI,对众包中的工作实践和任务的性质进行了实证研究;揭示了工人决定从事这种形式的工作的关键个人和环境因素;开发和实施工具,以改进和扩展众包的各个方面,例如设计和分配任务,激励措施或平台内的工作流程;并贡献了在众包工作中收集数据的新技术和专门知识,例如,如何在行为心理学、经济学或教育方面进行大规模调查和实验,并利用众包工作者的样本。我们对众包文献的初步阅读表明,研究依赖于一套相对狭窄的方法方法,主要是在线实验、调查和访谈。重要的是,众包研究倾向于将员工的经历作为时间快照来研究,而不是纵向研究或将其置于历史、环境和发展的背景中。这种零碎的方法给了研究界对众包实践的初步描述和解释,并为这个新兴的研究领域提供了一个重要的起点。然而,在各个领域的研究深度和缺失的部分,尚未得到系统的梳理。因此,本文系统地回顾了众包研究中使用的分析方法,找出了这些方法的差距。我们认为,为了将众包研究提升到一个新的水平,有必要在影响众包的个人和历史环境因素的背景下研究众包实践。为此,需要在社会学、心理学、个人、集体、在线、离线以及时间过程和众工实践之间架起桥梁的方法论方法。本文提出生命历程视角作为一个跨学科框架,可以帮助解决这些差距,并推进众包研究。最后,本文提出了一系列受《生命历程》启发的研究问题,以指导未来的众包研究。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
The Life Course: An interdisciplinary framework for broadening the scope of research on crowdwork
This paper reports outcomes of a systematic scoping review of methodological approaches and analytical lenses used in empirical research on crowdwork. Over the past decade a growing corpus of publications spanning Social Sciences and Computer Science/HCI have empirically examined the nature of work practices and tasks within crowdwork; surfaced key individual and environmental factors underpinning workers’ decisions to engage in this form of work; developed and implemented tools to improve and extend various aspects of crowdwork, such as the design and allocation of tasks and incentives or workflows within the platforms; and contributed new techniques and know-how on data collection within crowdwork, for example, how to conduct large-scale surveys and experiments in behavioural psychology, economics or education drawing on crowdworker samples. Our initial reading of the crowdwork literature suggested that research had relied on a limited set of relatively narrow methodological approaches, mostly online experiments, surveys and interviews. Importantly, crowdwork research has tended to examine workers’ experiences as snapshots in time rather than studying these longitudinally or contextualising them historically, environmentally and developmentally. This piece-meal approach has given the research community initial descriptions and interpretations of crowdwork practices and provided an important starting point in a nascent field of study. However, the depth of research in the various areas, and the missing pieces, have yet to be systematically scoped out. Therefore, this paper systematically reviews the analytical-methodological approaches used in crowdwork research identifying gaps in these approaches. We argue that to take crowdwork research to the next level it is essential to examine crowdwork practices within the context of both individual and historical-environmental factors impacting it. To this end, methodological approaches that bridge sociological, psychological, individual, collective, online, offline, and temporal processes and practices of crowdwork are needed. The paper proposes the Life Course perspective as an interdisciplinary framework that can help address these gaps and advance research on crowdwork. The paper concludes by proposing a set of Life Course-inspired research questions to guide future studies of crowdwork.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
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