Kristy Milland

Jonas Oppenlaender, Aku Visuri, Kristy Milland et al.

Crowdsourcing platforms are a powerful and convenient means for recruiting participants in online studies and collecting data from the crowd. As information work is being more and more automated by Machine Learning algorithms, creativity $-$ that is, a human's ability for divergent and convergent thinking $-$ will play an increasingly important role on online crowdsourcing platforms. However, we lack insights into what crowd workers think about creative work. In studies in Human-Computer Interaction (HCI), the ability and willingness of the crowd to participate in creative work seems to be largely unquestioned. Insights into the workers' perspective are rare, but important, as they may inform the design of studies with higher validity. Given that creativity will play an increasingly important role in crowdsourcing, it is imperative to develop an understanding of how workers perceive creative work. In this paper, we summarize our recent worker-centered study of creative work on two general-purpose crowdsourcing platforms (Amazon Mechanical Turk and Prolific). Our study illuminates what creative work is like for crowd workers on these two crowdsourcing platforms. The work identifies several archetypal types of workers with different attitudes towards creative work, and discusses common pitfalls with creative work on crowdsourcing platforms.

Jonas Oppenlaender, Kristy Milland, Aku Visuri et al.

General-purpose crowdsourcing platforms are increasingly being harnessed for creative work. The platforms' potential for creative work is clearly identified, but the workers' perspectives on such work have not been extensively documented. In this paper, we uncover what the workers have to say about creative work on paid crowdsourcing platforms. Through a quantitative and qualitative analysis of a questionnaire launched on two different crowdsourcing platforms, our results revealed clear differences between the workers on the platforms in both preferences and prior experience with creative work. We identify common pitfalls with creative work on crowdsourcing platforms, provide recommendations for requesters of creative work, and discuss the meaning of our findings within the broader scope of creativity-oriented research. To the best of our knowledge, we contribute the first extensive worker-oriented study of creative work on paid crowdsourcing platforms.

Snehalkumar, S. Gaikwad, Durim Morina et al.

Paid crowdsourcing platforms suffer from low-quality work and unfair rejections, but paradoxically, most workers and requesters have high reputation scores. These inflated scores, which make high-quality work and workers difficult to find, stem from social pressure to avoid giving negative feedback. We introduce Boomerang, a reputation system for crowdsourcing that elicits more accurate feedback by rebounding the consequences of feedback directly back onto the person who gave it. With Boomerang, requesters find that their highly-rated workers gain earliest access to their future tasks, and workers find tasks from their highly-rated requesters at the top of their task feed. Field experiments verify that Boomerang causes both workers and requesters to provide feedback that is more closely aligned with their private opinions. Inspired by a game-theoretic notion of incentive-compatibility, Boomerang opens opportunities for interaction design to incentivize honest reporting over strategic dishonesty.

Kotaro Hara, Abi Adams, Kristy Milland et al.

A growing number of people are working as part of on-line crowd work, which has been characterized by its low wages; yet, we know little about wage distribution and causes of low/high earnings. We recorded 2,676 workers performing 3.8 million tasks on Amazon Mechanical Turk. Our task-level analysis revealed that workers earned a median hourly wage of only ~\$2/h, and only 4% earned more than \$7.25/h. The average requester pays more than \$11/h, although lower-paying requesters post much more work. Our wage calculations are influenced by how unpaid work is included in our wage calculations, e.g., time spent searching for tasks, working on tasks that are rejected, and working on tasks that are ultimately not submitted. We further explore the characteristics of tasks and working patterns that yield higher hourly wages. Our analysis informs future platform design and worker tools to create a more positive future for crowd work.

Mark E. Whiting, Dilrukshi Gamage, Snehalkumar S. Gaikwad et al.

Crowd workers are distributed and decentralized. While decentralization is designed to utilize independent judgment to promote high-quality results, it paradoxically undercuts behaviors and institutions that are critical to high-quality work. Reputation is one central example: crowdsourcing systems depend on reputation scores from decentralized workers and requesters, but these scores are notoriously inflated and uninformative. In this paper, we draw inspiration from historical worker guilds (e.g., in the silk trade) to design and implement crowd guilds: centralized groups of crowd workers who collectively certify each other's quality through double-blind peer assessment. A two-week field experiment compared crowd guilds to a traditional decentralized crowd work model. Crowd guilds produced reputation signals more strongly correlated with ground-truth worker quality than signals available on current crowd working platforms, and more accurate than in the traditional model.