Milestone 4 researchinprogress
Design Axes for 3 Themes
List of Ideas and the Theme they belong to
Results: How might workers and requesters work together to produce higher-quality results?
Similarities:Italic text a) Both have a system to detect false reviewers. For example: Peer-Review-System involves filtering of unnecessary reviewers by a mechanism (this mechanism has not been mentioned on the wiki page, thus we are assuming that there will be a filtering mechanism otherwise the idea would be meaningless), same goes for the Quality-Control-Managers.
b) Both have outcomes benefits of filtering out the true workers and appreciating them for their work by payment.
c) Both of them include the idea of distributing the tedious work of a requester as one entity to decide on the correctness of a submitted work.
d) Both have a drawback that an incorrect HIT would get accepted, if majority of the workers/managers accept the HIT and only minority of the workers/managers actually went through the work and gave the result accordingly. This leads to false acceptance of both submitted work and managers.
e) Both of them only serve the issues of requesters and not the workers, so there might be many issues faced by workers which are not handled.
f) Since the work has to reviewed by either the peer workers or managers, thus the work is open for all to view, which can lead to higher chances of being plagiarised.
a) Peer-Review-System involves workers to review their colleagues while Quality-Control-Managers involves a new set of employees, labelled as managers which will judge the work done by workers.
b) Peer-Review-System involves rechecking by the requester itself of the bad/rejected HITs however, in the case of Quality-Control-Managers the rechecking of a HIT is done by majority rule. If maximum managers approve a work, then it is paid. It also helps them to filter the unwanted managers.
c) There is an edge of trust involved in the Quality-Control-Managers because the requesters do not review the rejected HITs however in the Peer-Review-System the rejected/invalid HITs are re-reviewed by the requester.
For each of the 3 ideas, describe (using diagrams, sketches, storyboards, text, or some combination) the ideas in further detail.
Please create a separate wiki page for each of your ideas, so we can link to them individually. The title of the wiki page should be Milestone 4 followed by your team name and a description of the idea itself (ex: Milestone 4 YourTeamName Reputation: Leveling System for Workers Leading to Better Wages). Once done, post a link to each of your THEME-related ideas to http://crowdresearch.meteor.com/ following the instructions at Milestone 4#Submitting