IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/taf/tbitxx/v42y2023i16p2871-2892.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Fair compensation of crowdsourcing work: the problem of flat rates

Author

Listed:
  • Joni Salminen
  • Ahmed Mohamed Sayed Kamel
  • Soon-Gyo Jung
  • Mekhail Mustak
  • Bernard J. Jansen

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.

Suggested Citation

  • Joni Salminen & Ahmed Mohamed Sayed Kamel & Soon-Gyo Jung & Mekhail Mustak & Bernard J. Jansen, 2023. "Fair compensation of crowdsourcing work: the problem of flat rates," Behaviour and Information Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 42(16), pages 2871-2892, December.
  • Handle: RePEc:taf:tbitxx:v:42:y:2023:i:16:p:2871-2892
    DOI: 10.1080/0144929X.2022.2150564
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1080/0144929X.2022.2150564
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1080/0144929X.2022.2150564?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
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    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:taf:tbitxx:v:42:y:2023:i:16:p:2871-2892. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: Chris Longhurst (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.tandfonline.com/tbit .

    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.