mlsanityData to 7 Oct 2026

Quantifying and Avoiding Unfair Qualification Labour in Crowdsourcing

arXiv 2105.12762 ↗First posted 26 May 2021cs.CL cs.HCcited by 11

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

Extensive work has argued in favour of paying crowd workers a wage that is at least equivalent to the U.S. federal minimum wage. Meanwhile, research on collecting high quality annotations suggests using a qualification that requires workers to have previously completed a certain number of tasks. If most requesters who pay fairly require workers to have completed a large number of tasks already then workers need to complete a substantial amount of poorly paid work before they can earn a fair wage. Through analysis of worker discussions and guidance for researchers, we estimate that workers spend approximately 2.25 months of full time effort on poorly paid tasks in order to get the qualifications needed for better paid tasks. We discuss alternatives to this qualification and conduct a study of the correlation between qualifications and work quality on two NLP tasks. We find that it is possible to reduce the burden on workers while still collecting high quality data.

Key facts. Cited by 11 papers in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 6 of its 41 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 26 May 2021.

Builds on

6 of 41 references.

References · 6

  1. 2018AllenNLP: A Deep Semantic Natural Language Processing Platformcited by 347
  2. 2021Beyond Fair Pay: Ethical Implications of NLP Crowdsourcingcited by 52
  3. 2017A Data-Driven Analysis of Workers' Earnings on Amazon Mechanical Turkcited by 38
  4. 2019Controlled Crowdsourcing for High-Quality QA-SRL Annotationcited by 34
  5. 2020Creativity on Paid Crowdsourcing Platformscited by 4
  6. 2020Human computation requires and enables a new approach to ethical reviewcited by 2

Built on by

Cited by year

Citing papers per year: 2022: 5; 2023: 4; 2024: 2.

11 papers.