View source for WinterMilestone 2 fourtypercent



== Attend a Panel to Hear from Workers and Requesters ==

=== Deliverable ===

For the note taking of the panel we used troll to work visually. 

/Users/ferdinandlinke/Library/Group Containers/Q79WDW8YH9.com.evernote.Evernote/Evernote/quick-note/ferlin___Evernote/quick-note-wByEH1/attachment--Wbakro/screenshot.png

Report on some of the observations you gathered during the panel.

Main Observations: Being A Turker
[[]]
[[File:Requester_Chris.pngthumb|left|alt=A cartoon centipede reads books and types on a laptop.|The Wikipede edits ''[[Myriapoda]]''.]]

Main Observations: Being a Requester

Chris (In General):

What works well:


"one of the best things...as a requester... you can test and make hypothesis very fast"

Often we post a small badge to see if the Instructions make things
often they are emailing...
it would be better maybe to do it on turkeys nation... "Still a work around here"

Clearly convey to work what should be done is important

QUALITY AND REPUTATION

he had someone to do the commounication with the turkers for him
now not anymore but needs someone again 

Whis for automatic adjudications system (work could be done by people clearly well on this tasks)

Workers are represented as Serial numbers! Inhuman! He says this is why they are treated bad

REJECTION 

being aware of people that work conchíously
(has threshold system) 


Confident Guy... Knows what he does

== Reading Others' Insights ==

=== Worker perspective: Being a Turker  ===

1) What observations about workers can you draw from the readings? Include any that may be are strongly implied but not explicit.

2) What observations about requesters can you draw from the readings? Include any that may be are strongly implied but not explicit.

=== Worker perspective: Turkopticon ===

1) What observations about workers can you draw from the readings? Include any that may be are strongly implied but not explicit.

Workers are being exploit by the requesters. Requesters can reject tasks at any time. If the requesters decides to reject a completed task, they have little possiblity to get paid for a provided service. The requester on the other hand can keep the results. Fast payment is very important (30 days of waiting time is too much). The main issue is fairness. Either, there is a lack of transparency or worker do get exploit. Not many workers are actually complaining to Amazon. In general it seems like they value the possiblity of AMT.
Workers do like the possiblity of a platform to exchange experiences (and reviews). A rating/ranking platform can be seen as therapeutic option.

2) What observations about requesters can you draw from the readings? Include any that may be are strongly implied but not explicit.

Requesters want high quality work done cheap and fast. "Just in quality" (instead of just in time) can be seen as a theme.

=== Requester perspective: Crowdsourcing User Studies with Mechanical Turk ===

1) What observations about workers can you draw from the readings? Include any that may be are strongly implied but not explicit.

In this study, the turkers rated the quality of Wikipedia articles in a simple 7 point Likert scale. The results were then compared with ratings from professionals (wikipedia admins). The results were rather disappointing since the ratings from the admin differt a lot from the turkers. In a second experiment, they used the same setup, however with additional questions about the structure of the article itself (number of images, references, paragraphs) and a summary before they could submit their rating. The rating was closer to the admins' ratings. Also it deceased the number of invalid responses and increased the duration time.

From that we conclude that most of the turkers are looking for simple tasks that can be done fast and easy. Quality here, does not matter much.

2) What observations about requesters can you draw from the readings? Include any that may be are strongly implied but not explicit.

Requesters have to carefully design a study/task on AMT. Task which are fast and easy will likely lead to responses with reduced quality. Creating a request is not simple and needs attention to detail.

=== Requester perspective: The Need for Standardization in Crowdsourcing ===

1) What observations about workers can you draw from the readings? Include any that may be are strongly implied but not explicit.

2) What observations about requesters can you draw from the readings? Include any that may be are strongly implied but not explicit.

=== Both perspectives: A Plea to Amazon: Fix Mechanical Turk ===

1) What observations about workers can you draw from the readings? Include any that may be are strongly implied but not explicit.

2) What observations about requesters can you draw from the readings? Include any that may be are strongly implied but not explicit.

== Do Needfinding by Browsing MTurk-related forums, blogs, Reddit, etc ==

List out the observations you made while doing your fieldwork. Links to examples (posts / threads) would be extremely helpful.







=== Soylent: A Word Processor with a Crowd Inside ===

1) What observations about workers can you draw from the readings? Include any that may be are strongly implied but not explicit.

There are two types (lazy and eager) of workers, which can be both equally negative for a project.

2) What observations about requesters can you draw from the readings? Include any that may be are strongly implied but not explicit.

Requesters have to put in a lot of thought into designing tasks. Fast and easy designed tasks will very likely attract lazy turkers who will not complete a task with a high quality. The key is to find a middle path between both. The paper shows that one successful possiblity is to break down a big task (such as proofreading/shortening/optimizing a paper) into many small tasks and have the results verify by multiple turkers (by accepting similar findings).

== Synthesize the Needs You Found ==

List out your most salient and interesting needs for workers, and for requesters. Please back up each one with evidence: at least one observation, and ideally an interpretation as well.

=== Worker Needs ===

A set of bullet points summarizing the needs of workers.

* Example: Workers need to be respected by their employers. Evidence: Sanjay said in the worker panel that he wrote an angry email to a requester who mass-rejected his work. Interpretation: this wasn't actually about the money; it was about the disregard for Sanjay's work ethic.

=== Requester Needs ===

A set of bullet points summarizing the needs of requesters.

* Example: requesters need to trust the results they get from workers. Evidence: In this thread on Reddit (linked), a requester is struggling to know which results to use and which ones to reject or re-post for more data. Interpretation: it's actually quite difficult for requesters to know whether 1) a worker tried hard but the question was unclear or very difficult or an edge case, or 2) a worker wasn't really putting in a best effort.