Difference between revisions of "Milestone 1 RATH"

From crowdresearch
Jump to: navigation, search
Line 21: Line 21:
  
 
* What do you think can be improved about the system?
 
* What do you think can be improved about the system?
One of the goals of the project was to "create an interface efficient enough so as to provide livable wages to workers."  The pilot project sought to reverse engineer compensation.  They determined that the average worker had an efficiency level of 120 tasks per hour and an average salary of 20-25 Indian Rupees (.32 - .40 USD) per hour in their regular work, therefore tasks would have to average 0.18 to 0.20 Indian Rupees  per task to provide a living wage.  As this was simply a pilot project there would need to be a large number of requesters in order to build sufficient efficiency opportunities among workers to attain and maintain the needed task per hour ratios.  Also not addressed is current market compensation for similar work on more traditional desktop platforms.  Additional questions would include:  What is the efficiency of task per hour on a traditional desktop computer platform?  Does the limitation of speed on a low-end phone compromise this efficiency?  If there is a discrepancy between efficiency rates on platforms, how does this inform the compensation from the requesters standpoint?   
+
One of the goals of the project was to "create an interface efficient enough so as to provide livable wages to workers."  The pilot project sought to reverse engineer compensation.  They determined that the average worker had an efficiency level of 120 tasks per hour and an average salary of 20-25 Indian Rupees (.32 - .40 USD) per hour in their regular work, therefore tasks would have to average 0.18 to 0.20 Indian Rupees  per task to provide a living wage.  As this was simply a pilot project there would need to be a large number of requesters in order to build sufficient efficiency opportunities among workers to attain and maintain the needed task per hour ratios.  Also not addressed is current market compensation for similar work on more traditional desktop platforms.  Additional questions would include:  What is the efficiency of task per hour on a traditional desktop computer platform?  Does the limitation of speed on a low-end phone compromise this efficiency?  If there is a discrepancy between efficiency rates on platforms, how does this inform the compensation from the requesters standpoint?  Does this discrepancy compromise the ability to achieve sufficient efficiency to attain a "living wage".
  
 
=== mClerk ===
 
=== mClerk ===

Revision as of 18:51, 4 March 2015


Experience the life of a Worker on Mechanical Turk

Reflect on your experience as a worker on Mechanical Turk. What did you like? What did you dislike?

Experience the life of a Requester on Mechanical Turk

Reflect on your experience as a requester on Mechanical Turk. What did you like? What did you dislike? Also attach the CSV file generated when you download the HIT results.

Explore alternative crowd-labor markets

Compare and contrast the crowd-labor market you just explored (TaskRabbit/oDesk/GalaxyZoo) to Mechanical Turk.

Readings

MobileWorks

  • What do you like about the system / what are its strengths?

Mobile works in looking to broaden micro task markets by marginalized workers. Mobile works recognized that in India for example the desktop computer penetration was only .09%, while mobile phone penetration was much higher at 50%. They designed a minimal interface that would be usable in by a variety of cell phone grades and would be efficient even on a low-end mobile phone. This significantly increased the opportunity for acceptance and participation in the given market. The success of the this particular solution is in its simplicity. By keeping the UI at its most basic it was able to create widespread usability across local devices. The other great strength of the MobileWorks solution is the accuracy. Their solution utilized only single entry (one worker submission per task) and was able to begin at 89% accuracy. Speculation is that multiple entry could increase that accuracy to 98.79% and triple entry 99.89%.

  • What do you think can be improved about the system?

One of the goals of the project was to "create an interface efficient enough so as to provide livable wages to workers." The pilot project sought to reverse engineer compensation. They determined that the average worker had an efficiency level of 120 tasks per hour and an average salary of 20-25 Indian Rupees (.32 - .40 USD) per hour in their regular work, therefore tasks would have to average 0.18 to 0.20 Indian Rupees per task to provide a living wage. As this was simply a pilot project there would need to be a large number of requesters in order to build sufficient efficiency opportunities among workers to attain and maintain the needed task per hour ratios. Also not addressed is current market compensation for similar work on more traditional desktop platforms. Additional questions would include: What is the efficiency of task per hour on a traditional desktop computer platform? Does the limitation of speed on a low-end phone compromise this efficiency? If there is a discrepancy between efficiency rates on platforms, how does this inform the compensation from the requesters standpoint? Does this discrepancy compromise the ability to achieve sufficient efficiency to attain a "living wage".

mClerk

  • What do you like about the system / what are its strengths?
  • What do you think can be improved about the system?

Flash Teams

  • What do you like about the system / what are its strengths?
  • What do you think can be improved about the system?