Toloka平台作为在线调查参与者的来源:评估数据质量的经验

K. Gavrilov
{"title":"Toloka平台作为在线调查参与者的来源:评估数据质量的经验","authors":"K. Gavrilov","doi":"10.19181/4m.2021.53.5","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The article presents the experience of using Yandex Toloka crowdsourcing platform to recruit respondents for an online survey. Analyzing methodological publications on a similar foreign platform Amazon Mechanical Turk we put forward hypotheses about the data quality obtained via Toloka in comparison with the results collected using other convenience sample types –online panels and recruitment of respondents through social networks. Additionally, only based on the Toloka data, we assessed the indicator of respondent’s attentiveness. The main conclusion is that Toloka allows to recruit respondents quickly and at low cost, and the results are comparable in terms of quality to those obtained by other methods. In particular, respondents from Toloka almost always complete the survey, fill out questionnaires faster than other types of respondents, but less often than participants of the online panel have a tendency to “straightline” (i.e., give the same answers in a tabular question), just as often as social media respondents give answers to the open-ended question (but less frequently than online panel participants), although their responses are shorter. Only 36% of the respondents passed the attention check question, attentive participants had a longer questionnaire complete time and were less likely to be straightliners. The increase of reward did not increase the proportion of attentive respondents, but decreased the questionnaire filling out speed, increased the number of answers to the open question, and reduced the proportion of straightliners.","PeriodicalId":271863,"journal":{"name":"Sociology: methodology, methods, mathematical modeling (Sociology: 4M)","volume":"27 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-12-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Toloka platform as a source of online survey participants: an experience of assessing data quality\",\"authors\":\"K. Gavrilov\",\"doi\":\"10.19181/4m.2021.53.5\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The article presents the experience of using Yandex Toloka crowdsourcing platform to recruit respondents for an online survey. Analyzing methodological publications on a similar foreign platform Amazon Mechanical Turk we put forward hypotheses about the data quality obtained via Toloka in comparison with the results collected using other convenience sample types –online panels and recruitment of respondents through social networks. Additionally, only based on the Toloka data, we assessed the indicator of respondent’s attentiveness. The main conclusion is that Toloka allows to recruit respondents quickly and at low cost, and the results are comparable in terms of quality to those obtained by other methods. In particular, respondents from Toloka almost always complete the survey, fill out questionnaires faster than other types of respondents, but less often than participants of the online panel have a tendency to “straightline” (i.e., give the same answers in a tabular question), just as often as social media respondents give answers to the open-ended question (but less frequently than online panel participants), although their responses are shorter. Only 36% of the respondents passed the attention check question, attentive participants had a longer questionnaire complete time and were less likely to be straightliners. The increase of reward did not increase the proportion of attentive respondents, but decreased the questionnaire filling out speed, increased the number of answers to the open question, and reduced the proportion of straightliners.\",\"PeriodicalId\":271863,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Sociology: methodology, methods, mathematical modeling (Sociology: 4M)\",\"volume\":\"27 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-12-18\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Sociology: methodology, methods, mathematical modeling (Sociology: 4M)\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.19181/4m.2021.53.5\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Sociology: methodology, methods, mathematical modeling (Sociology: 4M)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.19181/4m.2021.53.5","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

本文介绍了使用Yandex Toloka众包平台招募在线调查对象的经验。通过分析国外类似平台Amazon Mechanical Turk上的方法学出版物,我们对通过Toloka获得的数据质量提出了假设,并将其与使用其他便利样本类型(在线小组和通过社交网络招募受访者)收集的结果进行了比较。此外,仅基于Toloka数据,我们评估了被调查者的注意力指标。主要结论是,Toloka允许以低成本快速招募受访者,并且结果在质量方面与其他方法获得的结果相当。特别是,来自Toloka的受访者几乎总是完成调查,填写问卷的速度比其他类型的受访者快,但比在线小组的参与者更少倾向于“直线”(即在表格问题中给出相同的答案),就像社交媒体受访者对开放式问题的回答一样频繁(但比在线小组参与者更少),尽管他们的回答更短。只有36%的受访者通过了注意力检查问题,注意力集中的参与者完成问卷的时间更长,而且不太可能是直截了当的人。奖励的增加并没有增加专注的受访者比例,但降低了问卷填写速度,增加了开放问题的回答数量,降低了直率的受访者比例。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Toloka platform as a source of online survey participants: an experience of assessing data quality
The article presents the experience of using Yandex Toloka crowdsourcing platform to recruit respondents for an online survey. Analyzing methodological publications on a similar foreign platform Amazon Mechanical Turk we put forward hypotheses about the data quality obtained via Toloka in comparison with the results collected using other convenience sample types –online panels and recruitment of respondents through social networks. Additionally, only based on the Toloka data, we assessed the indicator of respondent’s attentiveness. The main conclusion is that Toloka allows to recruit respondents quickly and at low cost, and the results are comparable in terms of quality to those obtained by other methods. In particular, respondents from Toloka almost always complete the survey, fill out questionnaires faster than other types of respondents, but less often than participants of the online panel have a tendency to “straightline” (i.e., give the same answers in a tabular question), just as often as social media respondents give answers to the open-ended question (but less frequently than online panel participants), although their responses are shorter. Only 36% of the respondents passed the attention check question, attentive participants had a longer questionnaire complete time and were less likely to be straightliners. The increase of reward did not increase the proportion of attentive respondents, but decreased the questionnaire filling out speed, increased the number of answers to the open question, and reduced the proportion of straightliners.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Qualitative social network analysis in practice: comparison of methods for network maps construction Experience of implementing discourse analysis and conceptual mapping of healthy eating communities Typology of professional trajectories of gifted individuals using neural network analysis Topic modeling for short texts: comparative analysis of algorithms Comparative analysis of the capabilities of WoS and eLibrary for analyzing bibliographic networks
×
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