Reputation Agent: Prompting Fair Reviews in Gig Markets

Our study presents a new tool, Reputation Agent, to promote fairer reviews from requesters (employers or customers) on gig markets. Unfair reviews, created when requesters consider factors outside of a worker's control, are known to plague gig workers and can result in lost job opportunities and even termination from the marketplace. Our tool leverages machine learning to implement an intelligent interface that: (1) uses deep learning to automatically detect when an individual has included unfair factors into her review (factors outside the worker's control per the policies of the market); and (2) prompts the individual to reconsider her review if she has incorporated unfair factors. To study the effectiveness of Reputation Agent, we conducted a controlled experiment over different gig markets. Our experiment illustrates that across markets, Reputation Agent, in contrast with traditional approaches, motivates requesters to review gig workers' performance more fairly. We discuss how tools that bring more transparency to employers about the policies of a gig market can help build empathy thus resulting in reasoned discussions around potential injustices towards workers generated by these interfaces. Our vision is that with tools that promote truth and transparency we can bring fairer treatment to gig workers.Comment: 12 pages, 5 figures, The Web Conference 2020, ACM WWW 202

A Case Study of Crowdsourcing Imagery Coding in Natural Disasters

Crowdsourcing and open licensing allow more people to participate in research and humanitarian activities. Open data, such as geographic information shared through OpenStreetMap and image datasets from disasters, can be useful for disaster response and recovery work. This chapter shares a real-world case study of humanitarian-driven imagery analysis, using open-source crowdsourcing technology. Shared philosophies in open technologies and digital humanities, including remixing and the wisdom of the crowd, are reflected in this case study.This research was funded through the European Commission FP7-ICT project: Citizen Cyberlab: Technology Enhanced Creative Learning in the field of Citizen Cyberscience

Are all ‘research fields’ equal? Rethinking practice for the use of data from crowd-sourcing market places

New technologies like large-scale social media sides (e.g., Facebook and Twitter) and crowdsourcing services (e.g., Amazon Mechanical Turk, Crowdflower, Clickworker) impact social science research and provide many new and interesting avenues for research. The use of these new technologies for research has not been without challenges and a recently published psychological study on Facebook led to a widespread discussion on the ethics of conducting large-scale experiments online. Surprisingly little has been said about the ethics of conducting research using commercial crowdsourcing market places. In this paper, I want to focus on the question of which ethical questions are raised by data collection with crowdsourcing tools. I briefly draw on implications of internet research more generally and then focus on the specific challenges that research with crowdsourcing tools faces. I identify fair-pay and related issues of respect for autonomy as well as problems with power dynamics between researcher and participant, which has implications for ‘withdrawal-withoutprejudice’, as the major ethical challenges with crowdsourced data. Further, I will to draw attention on how we can develop a ‘best practice’ for researchers using crowdsourcing tools

Partners No More: Relational Transformation and the Turn to Litigation in Two Conservationist Organizations

The rise in litigation against administrative bodies by environmental and other political interest groups worldwide has been explained predominantly through the liberalization of standing doctrines. Under this explanation, termed here the floodgate model, restrictive standing rules have dammed the flow of suits that groups were otherwise ready and eager to pursue. I examine this hypothesis by analyzing processes of institutional transformation in two conservationist organizations: the Sierra Club in the United States and the Society for the Protection of Nature in Israel (SPNI). Rather than an eagerness to embrace newly available litigation opportunities, as the floodgate model would predict, the groups\u27 history reveals a gradual process of transformation marked by internal, largely intergenerational divisions between those who abhorred conflict with state institutions and those who saw such conflict as not only appropriate but necessary to the mission of the group. Furthermore, in contrast to the pluralist interactions that the floodgate model imagines, both groups\u27 relations with pertinent agencies in earlier eras better accorded with the partnership-based corporatist paradigm. Sociolegal research has long indicated the importance of relational distance to the transformation of interpersonal disputes. I argue that, at the group level as well, the presence or absence of a (national) partnership-centered relationship determines propensities to bring political issues to court. As such, well beyond change in groups\u27 legal capacity and resources, current increases in levels of political litigation suggest more fundamental transformations in the structure and meaning of relations between citizen groups and the state

Chain of Testimony: The Holocaust Researcher as Surrogate Witness

Despite extensive critical debate, a positivist view of historical research which aspires to a dispassionate engagement with sources is still rife. Yet certain types of traumatic material, such as survivors' testimony and the Scrolls of Auschwitz, evoke powerful emotions and can stimulate in the researcher various kinds of phantasy. Is there some way that we can address these issues without ‘psychologising’ the Holocaust and Holocaust research? Can we simultaneously respect the historical material, the memory of the victims and the often unruly feelings that Holocaust research can excite? Can rigorous analysis sit comfortably alongside a more psycho-dynamically reflexive stance, and might the process of research be enriched by it? This paper discusses these issues through the concept of a ‘chain of testimony’ into which the researcher is inserted, thereby becoming in some sense a surrogate witness. It reflects upon the psycho-social dimensions of my own work and that of other children of Holocaust survivors, as well as other researchers in the field, including those examining the Scrolls of Auschwitz