Pith. sign in

REVIEW

Exploring Effectiveness of Inter-Microtask Qualification Tests in Crowdsourcing

Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.

This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.

SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event

T0 review · schema-true

One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.

pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp

arxiv 2012.10999 v1 pith:JI2ETELS submitted 2020-12-20 cs.HC

classification cs.HC
keywords qualificationtasktestwereworkersaccuracyactualannotation
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal
0 comments
read the original abstract

Qualification tests in crowdsourcing are often used to pre-filter workers by measuring their ability in executing microtasks.While creating qualification tests for each task type is considered as a common and reasonable way, this study investigates into its worker-filtering performance when the same qualification test is used across multiple types of tasks.On Amazon Mechanical Turk, we tested the annotation accuracy in six different cases where tasks consisted of two different difficulty levels, arising from the identical real-world domain: four combinatory cases in which the qualification test and the actual task were the same or different from each other, as well as two other cases where workers with Masters Qualification were asked to perform the actual task only.The experimental results demonstrated the two following findings: i) Workers that were assigned to a difficult qualification test scored better annotation accuracy regardless of the difficulty of the actual task; ii) Workers with Masters Qualification scored better annotation accuracy on the low-difficulty task, but were not as accurate as those who passed a qualification test on the high-difficulty task.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Pith tools