An official website of the United States government
Crowdsourcing platforms have traditionally been designed with a focus on workstation interfaces, restricting the flexibility that crowdworkers need. Recognizing this limitation and the need for more adaptable platforms, prior research has highlighted the diverse work processes of crowdworkers, influenced by factors such as device type and work stage. However, these variables have largely been studied in isolation. Our study is the first to explore the interconnected variabilities among these factors within the crowdwork community. Through a survey involving 150 Amazon Mechanical Turk crowdworkers, we uncovered three distinct groups characterized by their interrelated variabilities in key work aspects. The largest group exhibits a reliance on traditional devices, showing limited interest in integrating smartphones and tablets into their work routines. The second-largest group also primarily uses traditional devices but expresses a desire for supportive tools and scripts that enhance productivity across all devices, particularly smartphones and tablets. The smallest group actively uses and strongly prefers non-workstation devices, especially smartphones and tablets, for their crowdworking activities. We translate our findings into design insights for platform developers, discussing the implications for creating more personalized, flexible, and efficient crowdsourcing environments. Additionally, we highlight the unique work practices of these crowdworker clusters, offering a contrast to those of more traditional and established worker groups.
more »
« less
This content will become publicly available on August 3, 2026
A Comparative Study of Device Usage and Preferences Across Crowdsourcing Platforms
Flexibility is essential for optimizing crowdworker performance in the digital labor market, and prior research shows that integrating diverse devices can enhance this flexibility. While studies on Amazon Mechanical Turk show the need for tailored workflows and varied device usage and preferences, it remains unclear if these insights apply to other platforms. To explore this, we conducted a survey on another major crowdsourcing platform, Prolific, involving 1,000 workers. Our findings reveal that desktops are still the primary devices for crowdwork, but Prolific workers display more diverse usage patterns and a greater interest in adopting smartwatches, smart speakers, and tablets compared to MTurk workers. While current use of these newer devices is limited, there is growing interest in employing them for future tasks. These results underscore the importance for crowdsourcing platforms to develop platform-specific strategies that promote more flexible and engaging workflows, better aligning with the diverse needs of their crowdworkers.
more »
« less
- Award ID(s):
- 2238001
- PAR ID:
- 10639125
- Publisher / Repository:
- ACM
- Date Published:
- Page Range / eLocation ID:
- 239 to 261
- Format(s):
- Medium: X
- Sponsoring Org:
- National Science Foundation
More Like this
-
-
null (Ed.)Crowdsourcing platforms are powerful tools for academic researchers. Proponents claim that crowdsourcing helps researchers quickly and affordably recruit enough human subjects with diverse backgrounds to generate significant statistical power, while critics raise concerns about unreliable data quality, labor exploitation, and unequal power dynamics between researchers and workers. We examine these concerns along three dimensions: methods, fairness, and politics. We find that researchers offer vastly different compensation rates for crowdsourced tasks, and address potential concerns about data validity by using platform-specific tools and user verification methods. Additionally, workers depend upon crowdsourcing platforms for a significant portion of their income, are motivated more by fear of losing access to work than by specific compensation rates, and are frustrated by a lack of transparency and occasional unfair treatment from job requesters. Finally, we discuss critical computing scholars’ proposals to address crowdsourcing’s problems, challenges with implementing these resolutions, and potential avenues for future research.more » « less
-
Danforth, Christopher M. (Ed.)Emotions at work have long been identified as critical signals of work motivations, status, and attitudes, and as predictors of various work-related outcomes. When more and more employees work remotely, these emotional signals of workers become harder to observe through daily, face-to-face communications. The use of online platforms to communicate and collaborate at work provides an alternative channel to monitor the emotions of workers. This paper studies how emojis, as non-verbal cues in online communications, can be used for such purposes and how the emotional signals in emoji usage can be used to predict future behavior of workers. In particular, we present how the developers on GitHub use emojis in their work-related activities. We show that developers have diverse patterns of emoji usage, which can be related to their working status including activity levels, types of work, types of communications, time management, and other behavioral patterns. Developers who use emojis in their posts are significantly less likely to dropout from the online work platform. Surprisingly, solely using emoji usage as features, standard machine learning models can predict future dropouts of developers at a satisfactory accuracy. Features related to the general use and the emotions of emojis appear to be important factors, while they do not rule out paths through other purposes of emoji use.more » « less
-
Privacy and security researchers often rely on data collected through online crowdsourcing platforms such as Amazon Mechanical Turk (MTurk) and Prolific. Prior work---which used data collected in the United States between 2013 and 2017---found that MTurk responses regarding security and privacy were generally representative for people under 50 or with some college education. However, the landscape of online crowdsourcing has changed significantly over the last five years, with the rise of Prolific as a major platform and the increasing presence of bots. This work attempts to replicate the prior results about the external validity of online privacy and security surveys. We conduct an online survey on MTurk (n=800), a gender-balanced survey on Prolific (n=800), and a representative survey on Prolific (n=800) and compare the responses to a probabilistic survey conducted by the Pew Research Center (n=4272). We find that MTurk response quality has degraded over the last five years, and our results do not replicate the earlier finding about the generalizability of MTurk responses. By contrast, we find that data collected through Prolific is generally representative for questions about user perceptions and experiences, but not for questions about security and privacy knowledge. We also evaluate the impact of Prolific settings, attention check questions, and statistical methods on the external validity of online surveys, and we develop recommendations about best practices for conducting online privacy and security surveys.more » « less
-
Synchronous, face-to-face interactions such as brainstorming are considered essential for creative tasks (the old normal). However, face-to-face interactions are difficult to arrange because of the diverse locations and conflicting availability of people—a challenge made more prominent by work-from-home practices during the COVID-19 pandemic (the new normal). In addition, face-to-face interactions are susceptible to cognitive interference. We employ crowdsourcing as an avenue to investigate creativity in asynchronous, online interactions. We choose product ideation,a natural task for the crowd since it requires human insight and creativity into what product features would be novel and useful. We compare the performance of solo crowd workers with asynchronous teams of crowd workers formed without prior coordination. Our findings suggest that, first, crowd teamwork yields fewer but more creative ideas than solo crowdwork. The enhanced team creativity results when (1) team workers reflect on each other’s ideas, and (2) teams are composed of workers of reflective, as opposed to active or mixed, personality types. Second, cognitive interference, known to inhibit creativity in face-to-face teams, may not be significant in crowd teams. Third, teamwork promotes better achievement emotions for crowd workers. These findings provide a basis for trading off creativity, quantity, and worker happiness in setting up crowdsourcing workflows for product ideation.more » « less
