Abstract
ABSTRACT Compensating crowdworkers for their research participation often entails paying a flat rate to all participants, regardless of the amount of time they spend on the task or skill level. If the actual time required varies considerably between workers, flat rates may yield unfair compensation. To study this matter, we analyzed three survey studies with varying complexity. Based on the United Kingdom minimum wage and actual task completion times, we found that more than 3 in 4 (76.5%) of the crowdworkers studied were paid more than the intended hourly wage, and around one in four (23.5%) was paid less than the intended hourly wage when using a flat rate compensation model based on estimated completion time. The results indicate that the popular flat rate model falls short as a form of equitable remuneration, when perceiving fairness in the form of compensating one’s time. Flat rate compensation would not be problematic if the workers’ completion times were similar, but this is not the case in reality, as skills and motivation can vary. To overcome this problem, the study proposes three alternative compensation models: Compensation by Normal Distribution, Multi-Objective Fairness, and Post-Hoc Bonuses.
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.