Crowdsourced data in public administration research: A review and look to the future

IF 6.1 1区 管理学 Q1 PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION Public Administration Review Pub Date : 2024-04-09 DOI:10.1111/puar.13823
Justin M. Stritch, Mogens Jin Pedersen, Ignacio Pezo
{"title":"Crowdsourced data in public administration research: A review and look to the future","authors":"Justin M. Stritch, Mogens Jin Pedersen, Ignacio Pezo","doi":"10.1111/puar.13823","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Crowdsourcing platforms such as MTurk and Prolific have emerged as data sources for researchers in the social sciences. This article delves into the past, present, and future use of crowdsourced data in public administration scholarship. Through a review of published articles in top public administration journals (years 2013–2022), we uncover a general growth in the use of crowdsourced data over time. Additionally, we document how researchers have leveraged crowdsourced data to study a diverse range of themes and topics, with particular emphasis on survey experimental approaches and the examination of citizen attitudes and responses. Moreover, drawing on insights from a survey among quantitative public administration researchers, we discuss why the use of crowdsourced data is unlikely to diminish in the foreseeable future—despite ongoing debates regarding data quality and validity. We provide a set of guiding questions for researchers to consider when using crowdsourced data in public administration studies.","PeriodicalId":48431,"journal":{"name":"Public Administration Review","volume":"263 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":6.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-04-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Public Administration Review","FirstCategoryId":"91","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/puar.13823","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Crowdsourcing platforms such as MTurk and Prolific have emerged as data sources for researchers in the social sciences. This article delves into the past, present, and future use of crowdsourced data in public administration scholarship. Through a review of published articles in top public administration journals (years 2013–2022), we uncover a general growth in the use of crowdsourced data over time. Additionally, we document how researchers have leveraged crowdsourced data to study a diverse range of themes and topics, with particular emphasis on survey experimental approaches and the examination of citizen attitudes and responses. Moreover, drawing on insights from a survey among quantitative public administration researchers, we discuss why the use of crowdsourced data is unlikely to diminish in the foreseeable future—despite ongoing debates regarding data quality and validity. We provide a set of guiding questions for researchers to consider when using crowdsourced data in public administration studies.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
公共行政研究中的众包数据:回顾与展望
MTurk 和 Prolific 等众包平台已成为社会科学研究人员的数据来源。本文深入探讨了众包数据在公共管理学术领域的过去、现在和未来的使用情况。通过回顾顶级公共管理期刊上发表的文章(2013-2022 年),我们发现随着时间的推移,众包数据的使用普遍增长。此外,我们还记录了研究人员如何利用众包数据来研究各种不同的主题和课题,其中特别强调了调查实验方法以及对公民态度和回应的研究。此外,通过对定量公共管理研究人员的调查,我们讨论了为什么在可预见的未来,众包数据的使用不会减少--尽管关于数据质量和有效性的争论仍在继续。我们提出了一系列指导性问题,供研究人员在公共管理研究中使用众包数据时参考。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Public Administration Review
Public Administration Review PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION-
CiteScore
15.10
自引率
10.80%
发文量
130
期刊介绍: Public Administration Review (PAR), a bi-monthly professional journal, has held its position as the premier outlet for public administration research, theory, and practice for 75 years. Published for the American Society for Public Administration,TM/SM, it uniquely serves both academics and practitioners in the public sector. PAR features articles that identify and analyze current trends, offer a factual basis for decision-making, stimulate discussion, and present leading literature in an easily accessible format. Covering a diverse range of topics and featuring expert book reviews, PAR is both exciting to read and an indispensable resource in the field.
期刊最新文献
The evolving practice of UK Government ministers First impressions: An analysis of professional stereotypes and their impact on sector attraction Evaluating use of evidence in U.S. state governments: A conjoint analysis How scholars can support government analytics: Combining employee surveys with more administrative data sources towards a better understanding of how government functions Political accountability and social equity in public budgeting: Examining the role of local institutions
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1