Kwek Adrian
Senior lecturer in the Centre for University Core at the Singapore University of Social Sciences.
Ethics Hum Res. 2020 Jan;42(1):22-35. doi: 10.1002/eahr.500040.
The use of crowd workers as research participants is fast becoming commonplace in social, behavioral, and educational research, and institutional review boards are encountering more and more research protocols concerning these workers. In what sense are crowd workers vulnerable as research participants, and what should ethics reviewers look out for in evaluating a crowdsourced research protocol? Using the popular crowd-working platform Amazon Mechanical Turk as the key example, this article aims to provide a starting point for a heuristic for ethical evaluation. The first part considers two reputed threats to crowd workers' autonomy-undue inducements and dependent relationships-and finds that autonomy-focused arguments about these factors are inconclusive or inapplicable. The second part proposes applying Alan Wertheimer's analysis of exploitation instead to frame the ethics of crowdsourced research. The article then provides some concrete suggestions for ethical reviewers based on the exploitation framework.
在社会、行为和教育研究中,将众包工人用作研究参与者的做法正迅速变得普遍,机构审查委员会也遇到了越来越多与这些工人有关的研究方案。众包工人作为研究参与者在何种意义上是易受伤害的,伦理审查人员在评估众包研究方案时应留意什么?本文以广受欢迎的众包平台亚马逊土耳其机器人为关键示例,旨在为伦理评估的启发式方法提供一个起点。第一部分考虑了对众包工人自主性的两种公认威胁——不当诱导和依赖关系——并发现关于这些因素的以自主性为重点的论点尚无定论或不适用。第二部分建议改用艾伦·韦特海默对剥削的分析来构建众包研究的伦理框架。然后,本文基于剥削框架为伦理审查人员提供了一些具体建议。