IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0315853.html

Toward the validation of crowdsourced experiments for lightness perception

Author

Listed:
  • Emily N Stark
  • Terece L Turton
  • Jonah Miller
  • Elan Barenholtz
  • Sang Hong
  • Roxana Bujack

Abstract

Crowdsource platforms have been used to study a range of perceptual stimuli such as the graphical perception of scatterplots and various aspects of human color perception. Given the lack of control over a crowdsourced participant’s experimental setup, there are valid concerns on the use of crowdsourcing for color studies as the perception of the stimuli is highly dependent on the stimulus presentation. Here, we propose that the error due to a crowdsourced experimental design can be effectively averaged out because the crowdsourced experiment can be accommodated by the Thurstonian model as the convolution of two normal distributions, one that is perceptual in nature and one that captures the error due to variability in stimulus presentation. Based on this, we provide a mathematical estimate for the sample size needed to produce a crowdsourced experiment with the same power as the corresponding in-person study. We tested this claim by replicating a large-scale, crowdsourced study of human lightness perception with a diverse sample with a highly controlled, in-person study with a sample taken from psychology undergraduates. Our claim was supported by the replication of the results from the latter. These findings suggest that, with sufficient sample size, color vision studies may be completed online, giving access to a larger and more representative sample. With this framework at hand, experimentalists have the validation that choosing either many online participants or few in person participants will not sacrifice the impact of their results.

Suggested Citation

  • Emily N Stark & Terece L Turton & Jonah Miller & Elan Barenholtz & Sang Hong & Roxana Bujack, 2024. "Toward the validation of crowdsourced experiments for lightness perception," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 19(12), pages 1-15, December.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0315853
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0315853
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0315853
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0315853&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0315853?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Mullinix, Kevin J. & Leeper, Thomas J. & Druckman, James N. & Freese, Jeremy, 2015. "The Generalizability of Survey Experiments," Journal of Experimental Political Science, Cambridge University Press, vol. 2(2), pages 109-138, January.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Gilles Grolleau & Murat C. Mungan & Naoufel Mzoughi, 2024. "Punishment menus and their deterrent effects: an exploratory analysis," European Journal of Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 58(1), pages 1-19, August.
    2. Delis, Manthos & Galariotis, Emilios & Monne, Jerome, 2021. "Financial vulnerability and seeking expert advice: Evidence from a survey experiment," MPRA Paper 107095, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    3. Kelly Morrison & Daniela Donno & Burcu Savun & Perisa Davutoglu, 2025. "Competing judgments: Multiple election observers and post-election contention," The Review of International Organizations, Springer, vol. 20(2), pages 293-321, June.
    4. Adolfo Carballo‐Penela & Emilio Ruzo‐Sanmartín & Carlos M. P. Sousa, 2023. "Does business commitment to sustainability increase job seekers' perceptions of organisational attractiveness? The role of organisational prestige and cultural masculinity," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 32(8), pages 5521-5535, December.
    5. Kuehnhanss, Colin R. & Heyndels, Bruno, 2018. "All’s fair in taxation: A framing experiment with local politicians," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 65(C), pages 26-40.
    6. repec:osf:socarx:fy2we_v1 is not listed on IDEAS
    7. Dib-Slamani, Hind & Grolleau, Gilles & Mzoughi, Naoufel, 2022. "Robbing a robber is not robbing," The Quarterly Review of Economics and Finance, Elsevier, vol. 85(C), pages 1-7.
    8. Jiarui Ji & Runlin Lei & Xuchen Pan & Zhewei Wei & Hao Sun & Yankai Lin & Xu Chen & Yongzheng Yang & Yaliang Li & Bolin Ding & Ji-Rong Wen, 2026. "Leveraging LLM-based agents for social science research: insights from citation network simulations," Humanities and Social Sciences Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 13(1), pages 1-13, December.
    9. Karl D. Jackson & Giovanna Maria Dora Dore, 2021. "In Sizing Civil Society, Wording and Format Matter," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 155(3), pages 983-994, June.
    10. Soojong Kim, 2019. "Directionality of information flow and echoes without chambers," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 14(5), pages 1-22, May.
    11. Schwaiger, Rene & Hueber, Laura, 2021. "Do MTurkers exhibit myopic loss aversion?," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 209(C).
    12. Christopher Poliquin & Young Hou, 2025. "Policymaker Responses to CEO Activism," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 36(6), pages 2416-2434, November.
    13. repec:osf:osfxxx:y79u5_v1 is not listed on IDEAS
    14. César Merino-Soto & Manuel Fernández-Arata & Jaime Fuentes-Balderrama & Guillermo M. Chans & Filiberto Toledano-Toledano, 2022. "Research Perceived Competency Scale: A New Psychometric Adaptation for University Students’ Research Learning," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(19), pages 1-17, September.
    15. repec:osf:osfxxx:udz28_v2 is not listed on IDEAS
    16. Wieser, Luisa & Abraham, Martin & Schnabel, Claus & Niessen, Cornelia & Wolff, Mauren, 2023. "When are employers interested in electronic performance monitoring? Results from a factorial survey experiment," Discussion Papers 127, Friedrich-Alexander University Erlangen-Nuremberg, Chair of Labour and Regional Economics.
    17. Grolleau, Gilles & Mungan, Murat C. & Mzoughi, Naoufel, 2022. "Seemingly irrelevant information? The impact of legal team size on third party perceptions," International Review of Law and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 71(C).
    18. Petrik Runst, 2018. "Does Immigration Affect Demand for Redistribution? – An Experimental Design," German Economic Review, Verein für Socialpolitik, vol. 19(4), pages 383-400, November.
    19. Barbara Caci & Maurizio Cardaci & Silvana Miceli, 2019. "Development and Maintenance of Self-Disclosure on Facebook: The Role of Personality Traits," SAGE Open, , vol. 9(2), pages 21582440198, June.
    20. Andrew J. Thompson & Justin T. Pickett, 2020. "Are Relational Inferences from Crowdsourced and Opt-in Samples Generalizable? Comparing Criminal Justice Attitudes in the GSS and Five Online Samples," Journal of Quantitative Criminology, Springer, vol. 36(4), pages 907-932, December.
    21. Lala Muradova & Ross James Gildea, 2021. "Oil wealth and US public support for war," Conflict Management and Peace Science, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 38(1), pages 3-19, January.
    22. Shuyuan Yu & John E Opfer, 2024. "Cognitive support for political partisans’ understanding of policy data," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 19(10), pages 1-23, October.
    23. Marier, Christopher J. & Goodwin, Conor, 2026. "Force and fallout: Experimental evidence from a national test of the Community Expectations Standard," Journal of Criminal Justice, Elsevier, vol. 102(C).

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0315853. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.