The Mechanical Turk blog has a new entry today, by Sharon (Chiarella), titled "Cooking with Sharon" & Tip #3 Manage Your Reputation.
In the article, Sharon encourages requesters to do the following:
- Pay well - Don’t be fooled into underpaying Workers by comparing your HITs to low priced HITs that aren’t being completed.
- Pay fairly – Don’t reject an Assignment unless you’re SURE it’s the Worker who is wrong.
- Pay quickly – If you approve or reject Assignments once a week, Workers may do a few HITs and then wait to see if they are paid before doing more. This is especially true if you’re a new Requester and haven’t established your reputation yet.
Sharon then explains that workers do talk with each other in the forums, on Turkopticon, and so on, and collectively establish the reputation of the requester based on these factors. While there is nothing wrong with this "grapevine"-based reputation, it also illustrates some obvious features that the Mechanical Turk platform is missing.
Instead of outsourcing the task to third-party forums, Amazon should provide features that make the reputation of the requester more transparent, visible, and objective.
For example, each requester could have a profile, in which the workers can see:
- The total number of HITs, and rewards posted by the requester
- The rejection rate for the requester
- The distribution of working time for the HITs of the requester
- The effective hourly wage for the tasks completed for the requester
- The payment lag from completion of the task until payment
These are all elements that workers would find useful. They are statistics that contribute to the transparency of the market, and their objective nature makes the establishment of reputation much faster. Such objective characteristics are complementing the more subjective features used in the the grapevine-based reputation systems (Turker Nation, Turkopticon, etc), where only a subset of workers contribute and measure personal perceptions (e.g., was this task "well-paid" or not?). Of course, subjective reputation systems will continue to play their role, providing information that cannot be easily quantified. But they should not be the only reputation signal for the market.
Could there be side-effects if such a system is deployed? Yes. I can see some cases where this profile can introduce strange incentives in the market. (For example, it may be good to have a few of my tasks spammed and still pay immediately for the results, so that I can have high acceptance rate, HITs that require only a little bit of time to be completed, and show a high hourly wage.) But these are just details that can be addressed. There is no way that overall the market could suffer when such statistics become publicly available. (Sorry Mr \$0.23/hr-requester, you are not that valuable.)
Markets operate based on trust and are better with increased information efficiency. Any step towards this direction is a good step for the market participants and, by extension, for the market owner.