IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/h/spr/lnichp/978-3-031-80122-8_5.html
   My bibliography  Save this book chapter

Impact of Data Collection on ML Models: Analyzing Differences of Biases Between Low-Versus High-Skilled Annotators

Author

Listed:
  • Johannes Schneider

    (University of Liechtenstein)

  • Daniel Eisenhardt

    (Ruhr-University Bochum)

  • Christian Utama

    (Freie Universität Berlin)

  • Christian Meske

    (Ruhr-University Bochum)

Abstract

Labeled data is crucial for the success of machine learning-based artificial intelligence. However, companies often face a choice between collecting few annotations from high- or low-skilled annotators, possibly exhibiting different biases. This study investigates differences in biases between datasets labeled by said annotator groups and their impact on machine learning models. Therefore, we created high- and low-skilled annotated datasets measured the contained biases through entropy and trained different machine learning models to examine bias inheritance effects. Our findings on text sentiment annotations show both groups exhibit a considerable amount of bias in their annotations, although there is a significant difference regarding the error types commonly encountered. Models trained on biased annotations produce significantly different predictions, indicating bias propagation and tend to make more extreme errors than humans. As partial mitigation, we propose and show the efficiency of a hybrid approach where data is labeled by low-skilled and high-skilled workers.

Suggested Citation

  • Johannes Schneider & Daniel Eisenhardt & Christian Utama & Christian Meske, 2025. "Impact of Data Collection on ML Models: Analyzing Differences of Biases Between Low-Versus High-Skilled Annotators," Lecture Notes in Information Systems and Organization,, Springer.
  • Handle: RePEc:spr:lnichp:978-3-031-80122-8_5
    DOI: 10.1007/978-3-031-80122-8_5
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    To our knowledge, this item is not available for download. To find whether it is available, there are three options:
    1. Check below whether another version of this item is available online.
    2. Check on the provider's web page whether it is in fact available.
    3. Perform a search for a similarly titled item that would be available.

    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:spr:lnichp:978-3-031-80122-8_5. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    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.