skip to main content
research-article

Using Worker Self-Assessments for Competence-Based Pre-Selection in Crowdsourcing Microtasks

Published:23 August 2017Publication History
Skip Abstract Section

Abstract

Paid crowdsourcing platforms have evolved into remarkable marketplaces where requesters can tap into human intelligence to serve a multitude of purposes, and the workforce can benefit through monetary returns for investing their efforts. In this work, we focus on individual crowd worker competencies. By drawing from self-assessment theories in psychology, we show that crowd workers often lack awareness about their true level of competence. Due to this, although workers intend to maintain a high reputation, they tend to participate in tasks that are beyond their competence. We reveal the diversity of individual worker competencies, and make a case for competence-based pre-selection in crowdsourcing marketplaces. We show the implications of flawed self-assessments on real-world microtasks, and propose a novel worker pre-selection method that considers accuracy of worker self-assessments. We evaluated our method in a sentiment analysis task and observed an improvement in the accuracy by over 15%, when compared to traditional performance-based worker pre-selection. Similarly, our proposed method resulted in an improvement in accuracy of nearly 6% in an image validation task. Our results show that requesters in crowdsourcing platforms can benefit by considering worker self-assessments in addition to their performance for pre-selection.

References

  1. Yoram Bachrach, Thore Graepel, Gjergji Kasneci, Michal Kosinski, and Jurgen Van Gael. 2012. Crowd IQ: Aggregating opinions to boost performance. In Proceedings of the 11th International Conference on Autonomous Agents and Multiagent Systems-Volume 1. International Foundation for Autonomous Agents and Multiagent Systems, 535--542Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  2. David Boud. 2013. Enhancing Learning Through Self-Assessment. Routledge.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  3. Katherine A. Burson, Richard P. Larrick, and Joshua Klayman. 2006. Skilled or unskilled, but still unaware of it: How perceptions of difficulty drive miscalibration in relative comparisons. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 90, 1 (2006), 60.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  4. Carrie J. Cai, Shamsi T. Iqbal, and Jaime Teevan. 2016. Chain reactions: The impact of order on microtask chains. In Proceedings of the 2016 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. 3143--3154. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  5. Lydia B. Chilton, John J. Horton, Robert C. Miller, and Shiri Azenkot. 2010. Task search in a human computation market. In Proceedings of the ACM SIGKDD Workshop on Human Computation. ACM, 1--9. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  6. D. E. Difallah, M. Catasta, G. Demartini, P. G. Ipeirotis, and P. Cudré-Mauroux. 2015. The dynamics of micro-task crowdsourcing -- The case of Amazon MTurk. In Proceedings of the 24th International Conference on World Wide Web (WWW). ACM, 238--247. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  7. Steven Dow, Anand Kulkarni, Scott Klemmer, and Björn Hartmann. 2012. Shepherding the crowd yields better work. In Proceedings of the ACM 2012 Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work. ACM, 1013--1022. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  8. Christoph Dukat and Simon Caton. 2013. Towards the competence of crowdsourcees: Literature-based considerations on the problem of assessing crowdsourcees’ qualities. In Proceedings of the 3rd International Conference on Cloud and Green Computing. IEEE, 536--540. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  9. David Dunning. 2011. The dunning-kruger effect: On being ignorant of one’s own ignorance. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology 44 (2011), 247. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  10. David Dunning, Chip Heath, and Jerry M. Suls. 2004. Flawed self-assessment implications for health, education, and the workplace. Psychological Science in the Public Interest 5, 3 (2004), 69--106. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  11. Joyce Ehrlinger and David Dunning. 2003. How chronic self-views influence (and potentially mislead) estimates of performance. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 84, 1 (2003), 5.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  12. Joyce Ehrlinger, Kerri Johnson, Matthew Banner, David Dunning, and Justin Kruger. 2008. Why the unskilled are unaware: Further explorations of (absent) self-insight among the incompetent. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes 105, 1 (2008), 98--121. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  13. Ujwal Gadiraju, Besnik Fetahu, and Ricardo Kawase. 2015. Training workers for improving performance in crowdsourcing microtasks. In Proceedings of the 10th European Conference on Technology Enhanced Learning. EC-TEL 2015. Springer, 100--114. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  14. Ujwal Gadiraju, Ricardo Kawase, and Stefan Dietze. 2014. A taxonomy of microtasks on the web. In Proceedings of the 25th ACM Conference on Hypertext and Social Media. ACM, 218--223. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  15. Ujwal Gadiraju, Ricardo Kawase, Stefan Dietze, and Gianluca Demartini. 2015. Understanding malicious behavior in crowdsourcing platforms: The case of online surveys. In Proceedings of the 33rd Annual ACM Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI’15). 1631--1640.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  16. Lilly C. Irani and M. Silberman. 2013. Turkopticon: Interrupting worker invisibility in amazon mechanical turk. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. ACM, 611--620. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  17. Nicolas Kaufmann, Thimo Schulze, and Daniel Veit. 2011. More than fun and money. Worker motivation in crowdsourcing--A study on mechanical turk. A Renaissance of Information Technology for Sustainability and Global Competitiveness. 17th Americas Conference on Information Systems (AMCIS’11). Association for Information Systems, Detroit, Michigan, USA.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  18. Gabriella Kazai. 2011. In search of quality in crowdsourcing for search engine evaluation. In Advances in Information Retrieval. Springer, 165--176. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  19. Gabriella Kazai, Jaap Kamps, and Natasa Milic-Frayling. 2011. Worker types and personality traits in crowdsourcing relevance labels. In Proceedings of the 20th ACM International Conference on Information and Knowledge Management. ACM, 1941--1944. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  20. Gabriella Kazai, Jaap Kamps, and Natasa Milic-Frayling. 2012. The face of quality in crowdsourcing relevance labels: Demographics, personality and labeling accuracy. In Proceedings of the 21st ACM International Conference on Information and Knowledge Management. ACM, 2583--2586. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  21. Aniket Kittur, Ed H. Chi, and Bongwon Suh. 2008. Crowdsourcing user studies with mechanical Turk. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. ACM, 453--456. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  22. Aniket Kittur, Jeffrey V. Nickerson, Michael Bernstein, Elizabeth Gerber, Aaron Shaw, John Zimmerman, Matt Lease, and John Horton. 2013. The future of crowd work. In Proceedings of the 2013 Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work. ACM, 1301--1318. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  23. Michal Kosinski, Yoram Bachrach, Gjergji Kasneci, Jurgen Van-Gael, and Thore Graepel. 2012. Crowd IQ: Measuring the intelligence of crowdsourcing platforms. In Proceedings of the 4th Annual ACM Web Science Conference. ACM, 151--160. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  24. Marian Krajc and Andreas Ortmann. 2008. Are the unskilled really that unaware? An alternative explanation. Journal of Economic Psychology 29, 5 (2008), 724--738. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  25. Joachim Krueger and Ross A. Mueller. 2002. Unskilled, unaware, or both? The better-than-average heuristic and statistical regression predict errors in estimates of own performance. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 82, 2 (2002), 180.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  26. Justin Kruger and David Dunning. 1999. Unskilled and unaware of it: How difficulties in recognizing one’s own incompetence lead to inflated self-assessments. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 77, 6 (1999), 1121.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  27. Chinmay Kulkarni, Koh Pang Wei, Huy Le, Daniel Chia, Kathryn Papadopoulos, Justin Cheng, Daphne Koller, and Scott R. Klemmer. 2015. Peer and self assessment in massive online classes. In Design Thinking Research. Springer, 131--168. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  28. John Le, Andy Edmonds, Vaughn Hester, and Lukas Biewald. 2010. Ensuring quality in crowdsourced search relevance evaluation: The effects of training question distribution. In Proceedings of the SIGIR 2010 Workshop on Crowdsourcing for Search Evaluation. 21--26.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  29. Catherine C. Marshall and Frank M. Shipman. 2013. Experiences surveying the crowd: Reflections on methods, participation, and reliability. In Proceedings of the 5th Annual ACM Web Science Conference. ACM, 234--243. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  30. David Martin, Benjamin V. Hanrahan, Jacki O’Neill, and Neha Gupta. 2014. Being a turker. In Proceedings of the 17th ACM Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work 8 Social Computing. ACM, 224--235. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  31. David Martin, Jacki O. Neill, Neha Gupta, and Benjamin V. Hanrahan. 2016. Turking in a global labour market. Computer Supported Cooperative Work (CSCW) 25, 1 (2016), 39--77. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  32. Winter Mason and Siddharth Suri. 2012. Conducting behavioral research on Amazons Mechanical Turk. Behavior Research Methods 44, 1 (2012), 1--23. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  33. Tyler M. Miller and Lisa Geraci. 2011. Training metacognition in the classroom: The influence of incentives and feedback on exam predictions. Metacognition and Learning 6, 3 (2011), 303--314. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  34. Edward Newell and Derek Ruths. 2016. How one microtask affects another. In Proceedings of the 2016 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. ACM, 3155--3166. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  35. David Oleson, Alexander Sorokin, Greg P. Laughlin, Vaughn Hester, John Le, and Lukas Biewald. 2011. Programmatic gold: Targeted and scalable quality assurance in crowdsourcing. Human Computation 11, 11 (2011).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  36. Joel Ross, Lilly Irani, M. Silberman, Andrew Zaldivar, and Bill Tomlinson. 2010. Who are the crowdworkers?: Shifting demographics in mechanical turk. In CHI’10 Extended Abstracts on Human Factors in Computing Systems. ACM, 2863--2872.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  37. Thomas Schlösser, David Dunning, Kerri L. Johnson, and Justin Kruger. 2013. How unaware are the unskilled? Empirical tests of the signal extraction counter explanation for the Dunning--Kruger effect in self-evaluation of performance. Journal of Economic Psychology 39 (2013), 85--100.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  38. Barry Schwartz. 2004. The paradox of choice: Why less is more. Ecco, New York.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  39. Barry Schwartz and Andrew Ward. 2004. Doing better but feeling worse: The paradox of choice. Positive Psychology in Practice (2004), 86--104.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  40. Han Yu, Zhiqi Shen, Chunyan Miao, and Bo An. 2012. Challenges and opportunities for trust management in crowdsourcing. In Proceedings of the 2012 IEEE/WIC/ACM International Conferences on Intelligent Agent Technology (IAT’12). IEEE Computer Society, 486--493. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  41. Ujwal Gadiraju and Stefan Dietze. 2017. Improving learning through achievement priming in crowdsourced information finding microtasks. In Proceedings of the Seventh International Learning Analytics 8 Knowledge Conference. ACM, Vancouver, BC, Canada, 105--114. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library

Index Terms

  1. Using Worker Self-Assessments for Competence-Based Pre-Selection in Crowdsourcing Microtasks

      Recommendations

      Comments

      Login options

      Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

      Sign in

      Full Access

      • Published in

        cover image ACM Transactions on Computer-Human Interaction
        ACM Transactions on Computer-Human Interaction  Volume 24, Issue 4
        August 2017
        182 pages
        ISSN:1073-0516
        EISSN:1557-7325
        DOI:10.1145/3132166
        Issue’s Table of Contents

        Copyright © 2017 ACM

        Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

        Publisher

        Association for Computing Machinery

        New York, NY, United States

        Publication History

        • Published: 23 August 2017
        • Accepted: 1 June 2017
        • Revised: 1 April 2017
        • Received: 1 December 2016
        Published in tochi Volume 24, Issue 4

        Permissions

        Request permissions about this article.

        Request Permissions

        Check for updates

        Qualifiers

        • research-article
        • Research
        • Refereed

      PDF Format

      View or Download as a PDF file.

      PDF

      eReader

      View online with eReader.

      eReader