Henner Gimpel, Vanessa Graf-Seyfried, Robert Laubacher, Oliver Meindl
{"title":"Towards Artificial Intelligence Augmenting Facilitation: AI Affordances in Macro-Task Crowdsourcing.","authors":"Henner Gimpel, Vanessa Graf-Seyfried, Robert Laubacher, Oliver Meindl","doi":"10.1007/s10726-022-09801-1","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Crowdsourcing holds great potential: macro-task crowdsourcing can, for example, contribute to work addressing climate change. Macro-task crowdsourcing aims to use the wisdom of a crowd to tackle non-trivial tasks such as wicked problems. However, macro-task crowdsourcing is labor-intensive and complex to facilitate, which limits its efficiency, effectiveness, and use. Technological advancements in artificial intelligence (AI) might overcome these limits by supporting the facilitation of crowdsourcing. However, AI's potential for macro-task crowdsourcing facilitation needs to be better understood for this to happen. Here, we turn to affordance theory to develop this understanding. Affordances help us describe action possibilities that characterize the relationship between the facilitator and AI, within macro-task crowdsourcing. We follow a two-stage, bottom-up approach: The initial development stage is based on a structured analysis of academic literature. The subsequent validation & refinement stage includes two observed macro-task crowdsourcing initiatives and six expert interviews. From our analysis, we derive seven AI affordances that support 17 facilitation activities in macro-task crowdsourcing. We also identify specific manifestations that illustrate the affordances. Our findings increase the scholarly understanding of macro-task crowdsourcing and advance the discourse on facilitation. Further, they help practitioners identify potential ways to integrate AI into crowdsourcing facilitation. These results could improve the efficiency of facilitation activities and the effectiveness of macro-task crowdsourcing.</p>","PeriodicalId":47553,"journal":{"name":"Group Decision and Negotiation","volume":"32 1","pages":"75-124"},"PeriodicalIF":3.6000,"publicationDate":"2023-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9830624/pdf/","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Group Decision and Negotiation","FirstCategoryId":"91","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10726-022-09801-1","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"MANAGEMENT","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1
Abstract
Crowdsourcing holds great potential: macro-task crowdsourcing can, for example, contribute to work addressing climate change. Macro-task crowdsourcing aims to use the wisdom of a crowd to tackle non-trivial tasks such as wicked problems. However, macro-task crowdsourcing is labor-intensive and complex to facilitate, which limits its efficiency, effectiveness, and use. Technological advancements in artificial intelligence (AI) might overcome these limits by supporting the facilitation of crowdsourcing. However, AI's potential for macro-task crowdsourcing facilitation needs to be better understood for this to happen. Here, we turn to affordance theory to develop this understanding. Affordances help us describe action possibilities that characterize the relationship between the facilitator and AI, within macro-task crowdsourcing. We follow a two-stage, bottom-up approach: The initial development stage is based on a structured analysis of academic literature. The subsequent validation & refinement stage includes two observed macro-task crowdsourcing initiatives and six expert interviews. From our analysis, we derive seven AI affordances that support 17 facilitation activities in macro-task crowdsourcing. We also identify specific manifestations that illustrate the affordances. Our findings increase the scholarly understanding of macro-task crowdsourcing and advance the discourse on facilitation. Further, they help practitioners identify potential ways to integrate AI into crowdsourcing facilitation. These results could improve the efficiency of facilitation activities and the effectiveness of macro-task crowdsourcing.
期刊介绍:
The idea underlying the journal, Group Decision and Negotiation, emerges from evolving, unifying approaches to group decision and negotiation processes. These processes are complex and self-organizing involving multiplayer, multicriteria, ill-structured, evolving, dynamic problems. Approaches include (1) computer group decision and negotiation support systems (GDNSS), (2) artificial intelligence and management science, (3) applied game theory, experiment and social choice, and (4) cognitive/behavioral sciences in group decision and negotiation. A number of research studies combine two or more of these fields. The journal provides a publication vehicle for theoretical and empirical research, and real-world applications and case studies. In defining the domain of group decision and negotiation, the term `group'' is interpreted to comprise all multiplayer contexts. Thus, organizational decision support systems providing organization-wide support are included. Group decision and negotiation refers to the whole process or flow of activities relevant to group decision and negotiation, not only to the final choice itself, e.g. scanning, communication and information sharing, problem definition (representation) and evolution, alternative generation and social-emotional interaction. Descriptive, normative and design viewpoints are of interest. Thus, Group Decision and Negotiation deals broadly with relation and coordination in group processes. Areas of application include intraorganizational coordination (as in operations management and integrated design, production, finance, marketing and distribution, e.g. as in new products and global coordination), computer supported collaborative work, labor-management negotiations, interorganizational negotiations, (business, government and nonprofits -- e.g. joint ventures), international (intercultural) negotiations, environmental negotiations, etc. The journal also covers developments of software f or group decision and negotiation.