IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/aes/jetimm/v1y2016i1p9-22.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Crowdsourcing Platforms: Users’ Experience Exposed

Author

Listed:
  • Lucian-Florin Onișor

    (The Bucharest University of Economic Studies)

  • Daniela Ioniță

    (The Bucharest University of Economic Studies)

Abstract

Crowdsourcing is one of many ways that companies use to access a wide and varied range of resources that combined can generate superior performance. Our exploration tries to answer the question of how can a platform be effectively designed to attract and stimulate participant’s engagement. To address this inquiry, we selected two crowdsourcing platforms and compared the users’ experience from six perspectives: attractiveness, confidentiality, accuracy, usability, interaction and accessibility. The subjects were asked to perform some predefined tasks on the selected platforms. Their behavior was recorded using an eye-tracking device, which offered information about eye positions and movements during tasks. Visual behavior records were enriched with talk aloud protocols. This additional research method was used to understand subjects’ expectations, feelings and reasoning while executing the required tasks. After analyzing users’ experience from proposed perspectives, what seems to matter mostly when choosing a crowdsourcing platform, is – first of all - the platform’s design and secondly their own website navigation skills. Crowdsourcing platforms may attract or lose potential contributors with different capabilities just by modifying their website templates, by means of how information is presented. Nevertheless, a single website template could not satisfy all needs. Therefore, different abilities a user might have will influence him to select a crowdsourcing platform that match their way of thinking.

Suggested Citation

  • Lucian-Florin Onișor & Daniela Ioniță, 2016. "Crowdsourcing Platforms: Users’ Experience Exposed," Journal of Emerging Trends in Marketing and Management, The Bucharest University of Economic Studies, vol. 1(1), pages 9-22, September.
    • Handle: RePEc:aes:jetimm:v:1:y:2016:i:1:p:9-22
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.etimm.ase.ro/RePEc/aes/jetimm/2016/ETIMM_V01_2016_46.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Andrew R. Thomas & Nicolae Alexandru Pop & Ana Maria Iorga & Cristian Ducu (ed.), 2017. "Ethics and Neuromarketing," Springer Books, Springer, number 978-3-319-45609-6, March.
    2. Xavier Lecocq & Vanessa Warnier & Frédéric Fréry, 2015. "Competing with ordinary resources," Post-Print hal-01601831, HAL.
    3. Vanessa Georges & François Courtemanche & Sylvain Sénécal & Thierry Baccino & Pierre-Majorique Léger & Marc Frédette, 2015. "Measuring Visual Complexity Using Neurophysiological Data," Lecture Notes in Information Systems and Organization, in: Fred D. Davis & René Riedl & Jan vom Brocke & Pierre-Majorique Léger & Adriane B. Randolph (ed.), Information Systems and Neuroscience, edition 127, pages 207-212, Springer.
    4. Joanna N. Lahey & Douglas Oxley, 2016. "The Power of Eye Tracking in Economics Experiments," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 106(5), pages 309-313, May.
    5. Prpić, John & Shukla, Prashant P. & Kietzmann, Jan H. & McCarthy, Ian P., 2015. "How to work a crowd: Developing crowd capital through crowdsourcing," Business Horizons, Elsevier, vol. 58(1), pages 77-85.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. de Beer, Jeremy & McCarthy, Ian P. & Soliman, Adam & Treen, Emily, 2017. "Click here to agree: Managing intellectual property when crowdsourcing solutions," Business Horizons, Elsevier, vol. 60(2), pages 207-217.
    2. Paniagua, Jordi & Korzynski, Pawel & Mas-Tur, Alicia, 2017. "Crossing borders with social media: Online social networks and FDI," European Management Journal, Elsevier, vol. 35(3), pages 314-326.
    3. Cantarella, Michele & Strozzi, Chiara, 2019. "Workers in the Crowd: The Labour Market Impact of the Online Platform Economy," IZA Discussion Papers 12327, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    4. Xavier Gabaix, 2017. "Behavioral Inattention," NBER Working Papers 24096, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    5. Massa Saluzzo, Federica & Alegre, Inés, 2021. "Supporting entrepreneurs: The role of third-party endorsement in crowdfunding platforms," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 162(C).
    6. Schmidt, Gordon B. & Jettinghoff, William M., 2016. "Using Amazon Mechanical Turk and other compensated crowdsourcing sites," Business Horizons, Elsevier, vol. 59(4), pages 391-400.
    7. Juncai Jiang & Yu Wang, 2020. "A Theoretical and Empirical Investigation of Feedback in Ideation Contests," Production and Operations Management, Production and Operations Management Society, vol. 29(2), pages 481-500, February.
    8. Brown, Terrence E., 2017. "Sensor-based entrepreneurship: A framework for developing new products and services," Business Horizons, Elsevier, vol. 60(6), pages 819-830.
    9. Bridget K Behe & Patricia T Huddleston & Kevin L Childs & Jiaoping Chen & Iago S Muraro, 2020. "Seeing through the forest: The gaze path to purchase," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(10), pages 1-19, October.
    10. Raúl López-Pérez & Eli Spiegelman, 2020. "Using Eye-Tracking Techniques To Understand The Role Of Attention On Choice And Reversals," Working Papers 2001, Instituto de Políticas y Bienes Públicos (IPP), CSIC.
    11. Joanna N. Lahey & Douglas R. Oxley, 2021. "Discrimination at the Intersection of Age, Race, and Gender: Evidence from an Eye‐Tracking Experiment," Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 40(4), pages 1083-1119, September.
    12. Islam, Mazhar & Miller, Jacob & Park, Haemin Dennis, 2017. "But what will it cost me? How do private costs of participation affect open source software projects?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 46(6), pages 1062-1070.
    13. Mesfin G. Genie & Mandy Ryan & Nicolas Krucien, 2023. "Keeping an eye on cost: What can eye tracking tell us about attention to cost information in discrete choice experiments?," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 32(5), pages 1101-1119, May.
    14. Daniela Ioniță & Lucian-Florin Onișor, 2016. "Crowdsourcing and Outsourcing: Friends or Foes?," Journal of Emerging Trends in Marketing and Management, The Bucharest University of Economic Studies, vol. 1(1), pages 52-61, September.
    15. Lenart-Gansiniec, Regina, 2016. "Importance Of Crowdsourcing In Social Innovations: Evidence From Poland," Journal of Central European Green Innovation, Karoly Robert University College, vol. 4(3), pages 1-12.
    16. Prpić, John, 2017. "MOOCs and Crowdsourcing: Massive Courses and Massive Resources," SocArXiv uwess, Center for Open Science.
    17. Prpić, John, 2017. "The Fundamentals of Policy Crowdsourcing," SocArXiv wdtvh, Center for Open Science.
    18. Mandy Ryan & Nicolas Krucien & Frouke Hermens, 2018. "The eyes have it: Using eye tracking to inform information processing strategies in multi‐attributes choices," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 27(4), pages 709-721, April.
    19. Prpić, John, 2017. "Next Generation Crowdsourcing for Collective Intelligence," SocArXiv juqk6, Center for Open Science.
    20. Xing Wan & Jing Chen, 2019. "The relationship between platform choice and supplier’s efficiency- evidence from China’s online to offline (O2O)e-commerce platforms," Electronic Markets, Springer;IIM University of St. Gallen, vol. 29(2), pages 153-166, June.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Eye-tracking; crowdsourcing; talk aloud; design; neuro-marketing.;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • M31 - Business Administration and Business Economics; Marketing; Accounting; Personnel Economics - - Marketing and Advertising - - - Marketing
    • C91 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Design of Experiments - - - Laboratory, Individual Behavior
    • D83 - Microeconomics - - Information, Knowledge, and Uncertainty - - - Search; Learning; Information and Knowledge; Communication; Belief; Unawareness
    • O31 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Innovation; Research and Development; Technological Change; Intellectual Property Rights - - - Innovation and Invention: Processes and Incentives

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:aes:jetimm:v:1:y:2016:i:1:p:9-22. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Lucian Onisor (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/aseeero.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.