Milestone 4 pentagram

From crowdresearch
Jump to: navigation, search

This is the submission page for Milestone 4 by Team pentagram.

Design Axes for 3 Themes

Results

  • What do these ideas tend to have in common?
  1. Both ideas try to maintain transparency and fairness in decision making process(with regards to quality of HITs)
  2. Both ideas involve peer-involvement to make decisions
  • How do these ideas tend to differ?
  1. The peer-reviewing system involves the submitted HITs being reviewed by other similar workers . On the other hand, the quality-control-managers idea involves cross-validation of workers to develop a hierarchical system thereby assigning tasks based on managerial position in the ladder.
  2. The quality-control-managers system can involve some monetary loss, delay in project schedule or underperformance of workers. These are not present in the peer-reviewing system
  3. The peer-reviewing system involves additional payment for each review process, which is avoided in the quality-control-managers system

Task Clarity

  • What do these ideas tend to have in common?
  1. The work set by the requester must be reviewed by workers to see if the task is well described and lucid and whether the pay is worth the task before it can be posted. If it is not, then the requester has to redesign it based on workers' feedback and post it again.
  2. The requesters may be given ratings based on these parameters and this would act as a measure of trust on requesters for workers.
  • How do these ideas tend to differ?
The ideas differ on how to maximise worker outputs and ensure high quality work.
  1. Creating worker groups that evaluate the clarity of task, allot the task to specific members of the group, guide them on how to do it and review their work before sending the results to the requester.
  2. Creating personalisation and specialisation of tasks for workers based on their skill set and passion.

Resolution

  • What do these ideas tend to have in common?
  1. The disputed results or reviews have to be reviewed possibly by a third party.
  2. There is an implication on the worker/requester who is negatively reviewed.
  • How do these ideas tend to differ?
  1. In the Moderators Justification system the focus is on how/when the HIT is reviewed, while in the Proirity system(Hellbanding of bad actors) the focus is on the actions performed after the review process
  2. In the priority based system(Hellband for bad workers), there is no mention about the monetary terms between the workers and reqeuster(through the mediator?).Thus this system must be used along with the Moderators justification system,they are in fact complementary.

List of Ideas and the Theme they belong to

Milestone 4 pentagram Results: Peer Review System

Milestone 4 pentagram Task Clarity: Coherent Tasks

Milestone 4 pentagram Resolution: Conflict Resolution System