Milestone 15 Boomerang mental model for requester and worker

From crowdresearch
Jump to: navigation, search

Background reading: Comments from requesters collected by @spamgirl and @arichmondfuller on version 1 of boomerang mental model for requesters:

http://crowdresearch.stanford.edu/w/index.php?title=150828_wording_responses

Note that the comments collected by @spamgirl were from micro-task requesters and the comments collected by @arichmondfuller were from macro-task requesters.


Version 4 based on feedback by @aginzberg @rohit @dilrukshi @arichmondfuller


What the requester sees

This worker gets...

√+: early access to your tasks

√: normal access to your tasks

√-: last access to your tasks



What the worker sees

This requester will be at the...

√+: top of your task feed

√: middle of your task feed

√-: bottom of your task feed

Your access to the tasks are based on the ratings you are given.



This is requester and worker interface screenshots from @neilthemathguy et al which are pinned the the #reputation-system channel

Amendment request: On the requester page include the list of workers who have been selected to do a particular task.

Suggestions by @dilruki @arichmondfuller We need to make sure that we use the √+, √, √- instead of the thumbs up, three lines and thumbs down icons. To explain the meanings of the checks, we suggest having a hover pop-up appear (with the mental model outlined above that perhaps @karolina and the design team could make beautiful) as you mouse over the icons to explain what each check means.

Comment from @aginzberg ***We should think about whether we need to tweak the mental model for our experiments. In the worker study for example, the task feed will be nearly functioning as a dashboard because that is where they will be rating and seeing payment and we need to be sure to drill the point home for the boomerang workers.***

Requester_to_Worker.png
Worker-Requester.png ‎

Comments by @asmitagupta Shouldn't we have the list of workers who accepted to take the particular task for that requester on requester's page ? so that their will be an idea of how many workers are planning to do that task



Archived material:


Comments on Version 3:

@rohit (from Slack and edited by @arichmondfuller) ...the top / mid / bottom paradigm is not really true since if there are no "top" tasks, the worker would see the requesters tasks that are available or nothing at all due to cascading. The task feed would be empty until the minimum module rating drops to the workers rating, which allows workers with higher ratings to attempt the task so its not on a first come first serve basis.

@arichmondfuller based on Rohit's comments, may I suggest we add "Your access to the tasks are based on the ratings you are given." to the bottom of the mental model? Version 3 for comment:


What the requester sees

This worker gets...

√+: early access to your tasks

√: normal access to your tasks

√-: last access to your tasks


What the worker sees

This requester will be at the...

√+: top of your task feed

√: middle of your task feed

√-: bottom of your task feed



Version 2

For requesters: When you rate a worker, the workers whom you rank highly (✓+) will get early (privileged) access to your future work, whilst those whom you rank low (✓-) will not receive access to your future work at all. Those whom you rank as simply acceptable (✓)will receive standard access to your future work. By providing this feedback, you will also help to improve the overall quality of results delivered by Daemo.

For workers: If you rate a requester ✓+, then their tasks will appear at the top of your task feed and if you rate them ✓-, then their tasks will be buried at the bottom of your feed. Ratings of ✓ will not change their location in your feed.