Advertisement

Please Stay vs Let’s Play: Social Pressure Incentives in Paid Collaborative Crowdsourcing

  • Oluwaseyi Feyisetan
  • Elena Simperl
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 9671)

Abstract

Crowdsourcing via paid microtasks has traditionally been approached as an individual activity with units of work created and completed independently. Other forms of crowdsourcing have however, embraced a mixed model that further allows for interaction and collaboration. In this paper, we expand the model of collaborative crowdsourcing to explore the role of social pressure and social flow generated by partners, as sources of incentives for improved output. We designed experiments wherein a worker could request their partner to collaboratively complete more tasks than required, either not to be abandoned and lose money (social pressure), or for fun (social flow). Our experiments reveal that these socially motivated incentives can act as furtherance mechanisms improving output by over 30 % and accuracy by about 5 %.

Keywords

Paid microtask crowdsourcing Collaboration Social pressure Social flow Incentives engineering 

References

  1. 1.
    Bernstein, M.S., Brandt, J., Miller, R.C., Karger, D.R.: Crowds in two seconds: enabling realtime crowd-powered interfaces. In: Proceedings of the 24th Annual ACM Symposium on User Interface Software and TechnologyGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Brzozowski, M.J., Sandholm, T., Hogg, T.: Effects of feedback and peer pressure on contributions to enterprise social media. In: Proceedings of the ACM International Conference on Supporting Group Work (2009)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Calvó-Armengol, A., Jackson, M.O.: Peer pressure. J. Eur. Econ. Assoc. 8(1), 62–89 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Csikszentmihalyi, M.: Flow: The Psychology of Optimal Experience, vol. 41. Harper Perennial, New York (1991)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Dawson, R., Bynghall, S.: Getting Results from Crowds. Advanced Human Technologies, San Francisco (2012)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Feyisetan, O., Simperl, E., Van Kleek, M., Shadbolt, N.: Improving paid microtasks through gamification and adaptive furtherance incentives. In: Proceedings of the 24th International Conference on World Wide Web (2015)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Jackson, S.A., Csikszentmihalyi, M.: Flow in Sports. Human Kinetics, Champaign (1999)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Joukhador, J., Blaszczynski, A., Maccallum, F.: Superstitious beliefs in gambling among problem and non-problem gamblers: preliminary data. J. Gambl. Stud. 20(2), 171–180 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Kandel, E., Lazear, E.P.: Peer pressure and partnerships. J. Polit. Econ. 100, 801–817 (1992)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Kaufmann, N., Schulze, T., Veit, D.: More than fun and money. worker motivation in crowdsourcing-a study on mechanical turk. In: AMCIS, vol. 11, pp. 1–11 (2011)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Kittur, A.: Crowdsourcing, collaboration and creativity. ACM Crossroads 17(2), 22–26 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Kittur, A., Smus, B., Khamkar, S., Kraut, R.E.: Crowdforge: crowdsourcing complex work. In: Proceedings of the 24th Annual ACM symposium on User Interface Software and Technology, pp. 43–52. ACM (2011)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Mason, W., Watts, D.J.: Financial incentives and the performance of crowds. ACM SIGKDD Explor. Newsl. 11(2), 100–108 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    McGonigal, J.: Reality is Broken: Why Games Make Us Better and How They Can Change the World. Penguin Group, London (2011)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Tinati, R., Van Kleek, M., Simperl, E., Luczak-Rösch, M., Simpson, R., Shadbolt, N.: Designing for citizen data analysis: a cross-sectional case study of a multi-domain citizen science platform. In: Proceedings of the 33rd Annual ACM Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (2015)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    von Ahn, L.,Dabbish, L.: Labeling images with a computer game. In: Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, CHI 2004, pp. 319–326. ACM, New York, NY, USA (2004)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Walker, C.J.: Experiencing flow: is doing it together better than doing it alone? J. Positive Psychol. 5(1), 3–11 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.University of SouthamptonSouthamptonUK

Personalised recommendations