Academia.eduAcademia.edu

Outline

Title
Abstract
Introduction
Data and Methods
Personal Data Work
Conclusion and Limitations
References
All Topics
Philosophy
Ethics

Research Ethics in the Age of Digital Platforms

Profile image of antonio carlos santos juniorantonio carlos santos junior

Science and Engineering Ethics

https://doi.org/10.1007/S11948-023-00437-1
visibility

…

description

18 pages

link

1 file

Abstract

Scientific research is growingly increasingly reliant on "microwork" or "crowdsourcing" provided by digital platforms to collect new data. Digital platforms connect clients and workers, charging a fee for an algorithmically managed workflow based on Terms of Service agreements. Although these platforms offer a way to make a living or complement other sources of income, microworkers lack fundamental labor rights and basic safe working conditions, especially in the Global South. We ask how researchers and research institutions address the ethical issues involved in considering microworkers as "human participants." We argue that current scientific research fails to treat microworkers in the same way as in-person human participants, producing de facto a double morality: one applied to people with rights acknowledged by states and international bodies (e.g., the Helsinki Declaration), the other to guest workers of digital autocracies who have almost no right...

Related papers

Researching precarious, virtual and clandestine labour
Ron Iphofen

Work Organisation, Labour & Globalisation

Introducing this volume, this article reflects on recent changes that brought to the editors’ attention the need for this special issue on the methodological and ethical challenges facing those who research precarious, virtual and clandestine labour in the 21st century. An exponential spread of algorithmically managed platform labour, just-in-time working, micro-work, teleworking and other trends associated with digitalisation has converged with traditional patterns of work in the informal economy, including clandestine practices, such as the use of child labour, trafficked labour and slave labour, to create a dynamically shifting labour market that cannot be captured by traditional means using existing indicators. Simultaneously, digitalisation has introduced the possibility of new research methods, raising new ethical challenges, as well as stimulating the adaptation of older forms of ethnographic research including participant observation and action research. It discusses the art...

View PDFchevron_right
Counting ‘micro-workers’: societal and methodological challenges around new forms of labour
Antonio Casilli

Work Organisation, Labour & Globalisation, 2020

'Micro-work' consists of fragmented data tasks that myriad providers execute on online platforms. While crucial to the development of data-based technologies, this poorly visible and geographically spread activity is particularly difficult to measure. To fill this gap, we combined qualitative and quantitative methods (online surveys, in-depth interviews, capture-recapture techniques and web traffic analytics) to count micro-workers in a single country, France. On the basis of this analysis, we estimate that approximately 260,000 people are registered with micro-work platforms. Of these, some 50,000 are 'regular' workers who do micro-tasks at least monthly and we speculate that using a more restrictive measure of 'very active' workers decreases this figure to 15,000. This analysis contributes to research on platform labour and the labour in the digital economy that lies behind artificial intelligence.

View PDFchevron_right
Unfairness by Design? The Perceived Fairness of Digital Labor on Crowdworking Platforms
Christian Fieseler

Journal of Business Ethics

Based on a qualitative survey among 203 US workers active on the microwork platform Amazon Mechanical Turk, we analyze potential biases embedded in the institutional setting provided by ondemand crowdworking platforms and their effect on perceived workplace fairness. We explore the triadic relationship between employers, workers, and platform providers, focusing on the power of platform providers to design settings and processes that affect workers' fairness perceptions. Our focus is on workers' awareness of the new institutional setting, frames applied to the mediating platform, and a differentiated analysis of distinct fairness dimensions.

View PDFchevron_right
Shepherd’s Office. The Politics of Digital Labor and Its Impact on the Amazon Mechanical Turk Workers
Žaneta Zukalová

NMC media-n, 2020

Shepherd's Office (SO) is a collaborative performance and research project between artists Daniela Vainio and Zaneta Zukalova, first introduced at Tate Modern (Tate Exchange) London in 2017, which questions the systematic order of Amazon Mechanical Turk. In May 2019, SO held a live investigative performance at the Art Fair Suomi in Helsinki, with an aim to collect the data that informs this article; SO's focus was on the socio-political background of Amazon Mechanical Turk Workers and their personal relations to and opinions on the platform. The present article introduces both the artistic and investigative aspects of the project and the problematics of Amazon Mechanical Turk, and offers an insight into the research inputs, processes, and outcomes.

View PDFchevron_right
Ethical problems in virtual research: Enmeshing the blurriness with Twitter data
Kerry Power

E-Learning and Digital Media, 2019

When conceptualising knowledge gained from tapping into an internet data pool, one may question many things which can include the role of the researcher and the researched, privacy and ethics, intention, authenticity and the vastness of scope. The researcher, regardless of research intention including moral or ethical positions, must acknowledge that there are billions of nuances affecting online user participation. Ethical boundaries surrounding available data deemed ‘public’ in a program like Twitter, for example, are not easily wrapped in a terms of service agreement. Ethical problems in virtual research are expansive, and it is necessary to frame how and why researchers should address them. In the following paper, I outline some significant ethical issues in virtual research and address perceived pluralities as enmeshment. Drawing on Barad's ( 2007 , 2010 , 2014 ) theoretical model of diffraction, I poke holes through ethical blurriness and think through ethical possibilitie...

View PDFchevron_right
Ethics in Digital Research, in SAGE Handbook for Qualitative Data Collection, edited by Uwe Flick, 2018
Katrin Tiidenberg
View PDFchevron_right
(2012) The Ethical Work That Regulations Will Not Do
Annamaria Carusi

Ethical concerns in e-social science are often raised with respect to privacy, confidentiality, anonymity and the ethical and legal requirements that govern research. In this article, the authors focus on ethical aspects of e-research that are not directly related to ethical regulatory framework or requirements. These frameworks are often couched in terms of benefits or harms that can be incurred by participants in the research. The authors shift the focus to the sources of value in terms of which benefits or harms are understood in real social situations. A central claim of this paper is that the technologies that are used for research are not value neutral, but serve to reinforce some values at the expense of others. The authors discuss databases, modelling and simulation, network analysis as examples of technologies which affect the articulation of values. A view of e-social science as a techno-scientific constellation of researchers, technologies and society, in which values are always already embedded, is put forward as a basis for a view of ethics as reflexive and active engagement, conducted with awareness. Methodological pluralism and proactive openness are also proposed as responses to this view of the ethical dimensions of e-social science. Can also be found on SSRN: http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1994451

View PDFchevron_right
“Yes, I Will Work on My Free Time” – Digital Work on Amazon Mechanical Turk as the Historical Continuation of the Exploitation of Women's Labor
Amanda Chevtchouk Jurno

AoIR Selected Papers of Internet Research, 2021

In this proposal, we pursue an approximation to Amazon Mechanical Turk (AMT) women workers to understand their specificities and their layers of dependence in this environment so pertinent to the “late capitalism” (Crary 2016). AMT is an online platform where workers perform low-paid services that cannot be efficiently automated. Since 2019, in the Group [Anonymized excerpt], at the University [Anonymized excerpt], we have carried out projects where we approach these workers in an attempt to understand their routines, desires and the future of work itself. In our experiences, it has become evident that women turkers tend to be even more precarious due to gender issues passed to AMT. Also we concluded that AMT help keeping the women labor power available for unpaid domestic services and, at the same time, make it profitable for several companies. To understand more about them, we conducted a survey with 53 women turkers and systematized their responses. We approached some of them to ...

View PDFchevron_right
Realizing Decent Work in the Platform Economy: Addressing Intermediated Platform Employment in Food Delivery and Data Work
Shikha Silliman Bhattacharjee

Equidem, 2025

This brief exposes the systemic abuse faced by food delivery riders and data workers—such as content moderators and data labellers—who are hired through third-party logistics (3PL) and outsourcing (BPO) firms. Drawing on interviews with over 200 workers across the Gulf, Africa, Latin America, and Asia, it reveals how global platforms like Meta and OpenAI outsource labour to evade responsibility, resulting in widespread forced labour risks, unsafe conditions, wage theft, and retaliation against those who try to organise. The brief urges the International Labour Conference (ILC) and national regulators to recognise these workers under international labour standards, hold lead firms jointly accountable with their intermediaries, prohibit the use of NDAs to silence abuse, and extend full protections for occupational health, safety, and the right to organise.

View PDFchevron_right
Digital Labour Platforms in the Global South: Filling or Creating Institutional Voids?
Richard Heeks

SSRN Electronic Journal, 2020

The impact of platforms in the global South is under-researched. This paper analyses the role of platforms in relation to "institutional voids": absences or shortcomings of formal institutions that can create shortfalls in the operation of markets. Through a mix of primary and secondary research, this paper studies gig economy platforms like Uber and Upwork that digitise labour market functions. It finds that platforms do beneficially fill voids: creating new and, in some ways, better jobs. But their digital void-filling concentrates power and constrains worker behaviour. Simultaneously, platforms maintain or create institutional voids, leading to power asymmetries, over-competition between workers, platform opportunism, and job insecurity and precarity. The paper ends by suggesting practical actions to address these downsides of platformisation, and by identifying some future research priorities.

View PDFchevron_right

References (51)

  1. Anwar, A. M., & Graham, M. (2022). The digital continent. Placing Africa in planetary networks of work. Oxford University Press.
  2. Aytes, A. (2012). Return of the crowds: Mechanical Turk and neoliberal states of exception. In T. Scholz (Ed.), Digital labor (pp. 87-105). Routledge.
  3. Behrend, T. S., Sharek, D. J., Meade, A. W., & Wiebe, E. N. (2011). The viability of crowdsourc- ing for survey research. Behavior Research Methods, 43(3), 800-813. https:// doi. org/ 10. 3758/ s13428-011-0081-0
  4. Berg, J., Furrer, M., Harmon, E., Rani, U., & Silberman, M. S. (2018). Digital labour platforms and the future of work. In Towards decent work in the online world. Rapport de l'OIT.
  5. Berinsky, A. J., Huber, G. A., & Lenz, G. S. (2012). Evaluating online labor markets for experimen- tal research: Amazon.com's mechanical turk. Political Analysis, 20(3), 351-368. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1093/ pan/ mpr057
  6. Buhrmester, M., Kwang, T., & Gosling, S. D. (2011). Amazon's Mechanical Turk: A new source of inex- pensive, yet high-quality, data? Perspectives on Psychological Science, 6(1), 3-5. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1177/ 17456 91610 393980
  7. Buhrmester, M. D., Talaifar, S., & Gosling, S. D. (2018). An evaluation of Amazon's Mechanical Turk, its rapid rise, and its effective use. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 13(2), 149-154. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1177/ 17456 91617 706516
  8. Casilli, A. A., Tubaro, P., Le Ludec, C., Coville, M., Besenval, M., Mouhtare, T., & Wahal, E. (2019). Le micro-travail en France. Derrière l'automatisation de nouvelles précarités au travail? Rapport Final Projet DiPLab 'Digital Platform Labor'. http:// diplab. eu
  9. Cognilytica. (2020). Data preparation and labeling for AI 2020. Report CGR-DLP20.
  10. Couldry, N., & Mejias, U. A. (2019). Data colonialism: Rethinking big data's relation to the contem- porary subject. Television New Media, 20(4), 336-349. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1177/ 15274 76418 796632
  11. Crump, M. J. C., McDonnell, J. V., & Gureckis, T. M. (2013). Evaluating Amazon's Mechanical Turk as a tool for experimental behavioral research. PLOS One. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1371/ journ al. pone. 00574 10
  12. Denton, E., Hanna, A., Amironesei, R., Smart, A., & Nicole, H. (2021). On the genealogy of machine learning datasets: A critical history of ImageNet. Big Data & Society, 8(2), 205.
  13. Ekbia, H. R., & Nardi, B. A. (2017). Heteromation, and other stories of computing and capitalism. MIT Press.
  14. Floridi, L. (2020). The fight for digital sovereignty: What it is, and why it matters, especially for the EU. Philosophy and Technology, 33(3), 369-378. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1007/ s13347-020-00423-6
  15. Gleibs, I. H., & Albayrak-Aydemir, N. (2022). Ethical concerns arising from recruiting workers from Amazon's Mechanical Turk as research participants: Commentary on Burnette et al. (2021). Inter- national Journal of Eating Disorders, 55(2), 276-277. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1002/ eat. 23658
  16. Goodman, J. K., & Paolacci, G. (2017). Crowdsourcing consumer research. Journal of Consumer Research, 44(1), 196-210. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1093/ jcr/ ucx047
  17. Gray, M. L., & Suri, S. (2019). Ghost work how to stop Silicon Valley from building a new global under- class (Kindle Edi). HarperCollins.
  18. Grohmann, R., & Araújo, W. F. (2021). O chão de fábrica (brasileiro) da inteligência artificial: A produção de dados eo papel da comunicação entre trabalhadores de Appen e Lionbridge. Palabra Clave, 24(3), e2438-e2438.
  19. Hauser, D. J., & Schwarz, N. (2016). Attentive turkers: MTurk participants perform better on online attention checks than do subject pool participants. Behavior Research Methods, 48(1), 400-407. https:// doi. org/ 10. 3758/ s13428-015-0578-z
  20. Horton, J. J., Rand, D. G., & Zeckhauser, R. J. (2011). The online laboratory: Conducting experi- ments in a real labor market. Experimental Economics, 14(3), 399-425. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1007/ s10683-011-9273-9
  21. ILO. (2022). World employment and social outlook: Trends 2022. In World employment and social out- look: The role of digital labour the world of work. https:// doi. org/ 10. 54394/ dspl5 113
  22. Israel, M. (2015). Research ethics and integrity for social scientists. Beyond regulatory compliance. Sage.
  23. Kennedy, R., Clifford, S., Burleigh, T., Waggoner, P. D., Jewell, R., & Winter, N. J. G. (2020). The shape of and solutions to the MTurk quality crisis. Political Science Research and Methods, 8(4), 614- 629. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1017/ psrm. 2020.6
  24. Kottow, M. (2007). Participación informada en clínica e investigación biomédica: Las múltiples facetas de la decisión y el consentimiento informados. UNESCO.
  25. Lease, M., Hullman, J., Bigham, J., Bernstein, M., Kim, J., Lasecki, W., Bakhshi, S., Mitra, T., Miller, R. (2013). Mechanical Turk is not anonymous. Available at SSRN 2228728.
  26. Lindquist, J. (2022). Follower factories in Indonesia and beyond: Automation and labor in a transnational market. In M. Graham & F. Ferrari (Eds.), Digital work in the planetary market (p. 59). MIT Press.
  27. Martin, D., Carpendale, S., Gupta, N., Hoßfeld, T., Naderi, B., Redi, J., Siahaan, E., & Wechsung, I. (2017). Understanding the crowd: Ethical and practical matters in the academic use of crowdsourc- ing. In D. Archambault, H. Purchase, & T. Hoßfeld (Eds.), Crowdsourcing and human-centered experiments (pp. 27-69). Springer.
  28. Mason, W., & Suri, S. (2012). Conducting behavioral research on Amazon's Mechanical Turk. Behavior Research Methods, 44(1), 1-23. https:// doi. org/ 10. 3758/ s13428-011-0124-6
  29. Miceli, M., Schuessler, M., & Yang, T. (2020). Between subjectivity and imposition: Power dynamics in data annotation for computer vision. Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction, 4(CSCW2), 1-25.
  30. Michaels, D. (2020). The triumph of doubt: Dark money and the science of deception. Oxford University Press.
  31. Michaels, D., & Monforton, C. (2005). Manufacturing uncertainty: Contested science and the protection of the public's health and environment. American Journal of Public Health, 95(S1), S39-S48.
  32. Miller, J. D., Crowe, M., Weiss, B., Maples-Keller, J. L., & Lynam, D. R. (2017). Using online, crowd- sourcing platforms for data collection in personality disorder research: The example of Amazon's Mechanical Turk. Personality Disorders-Theory Research and Treatment, 8(1), 26-34. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1037/ per00 00191
  33. Molina, J. L., & Borgatti, S. P. (2021). Moral bureaucracies and social networks research. Social Net- works, 67, 13-19. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1016/j. socnet. 2019. 11. 001
  34. Mortensen, K., & Hughes, T. L. (2018). Comparing Amazon's Mechanical Turk platform to conventional data collection methods in the health and medical research literature. Journal of General Internal Medicine, 33(4), 533-538. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1007/ s11606-017-4246-0
  35. Moss, A. J., et al. (2021). Is it ethical to use Mechanical Turk for behavioral research? Relevant data from a representative survey of MTturk participants and wages. https:// doi. org/ 10. 31234/ osf. io/ jbc9d
  36. Ophir, Y., Sisso, I., Asterhan, C. S. C., Tikochinski, R., & Reichart, R. (2020). The turker blues: Hidden factors behind increased depression rates among Amazon's Mechanical Turkers. Clinical Psycho- logical Science, 8(1), 65-83. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1177/ 21677 02619 865973
  37. Paolacci, G., & Chandler, J. (2014). Inside the turk: Understanding Mechanical Turk as a participant pool. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 23(3), 184-188. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1177/ 09637 21414 531598
  38. Peer, E., Vosgerau, J., & Acquisti, A. (2014). Reputation as a sufficient condition for data quality on Amazon Mechanical Turk. Behavior Research Methods, 46(4), 1023-1031. https:// doi. org/ 10. 3758/ s13428-013-0434-y
  39. Posada, J. (2022). Embedded reproduction in platform data work. Information, Communication & Soci- ety. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1080/ 13691 18X. 2022. 20498 49
  40. Robinson, J., Rosenzweig, C., Moss, A. J., & Litman, L. (2019). Tapped out or barely tapped? Recom- mendations for how to harness the vast and largely unused potential of the Mechanical Turk partici- pant pool. PLoS ONE, 14(12), e0226394.
  41. Schmidt, F. A. (2022). The planetary stacking order of multilayered crowd-AI systems. In M. Graham & F. Ferrari (Eds.), Digital work in the planetary market (p. 137). MIT Press.
  42. Seeman, M. (1959). On the meaning of alienation. Sociological Review, 24(6), 783-791.
  43. Sheehan, K. B. (2018). Crowdsourcing research: Data collection with Amazon's Mechanical Turk. Com- munication Monographs, 85(1), 140-156. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1080/ 03637 751. 2017. 13420 43
  44. Srnicek, N. (2017). Platform capitalism. Polity Press.
  45. Strickland, J. C., & Stoops, W. W. (2019). The use of crowdsourcing in addiction science research: Ama- zon Mechanical Turk. Experimental and Clinical Psychopharmacology, 27(1), 1-18. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1037/ pha00 00235
  46. Tubaro, P., Casilli, A. A., & Coville, M. (2020). The trainer, the verifier, the imitator: Three ways in which human platform workers support artificial intelligence. Big Data & Society, 7(1), 2053951720919776. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1177/ 20539 51720 919776
  47. Tubaro, P., Coville, M., Le Ludec, C., & Casilli, A. (2022). Hidden inequalities : The gendered labour of women on micro-tasking platforms introduction : The gendered dimension of work on micro- tasking platforms. Internet Policy Review, 11(1), 1-26.
  48. Van Den Hoonaard, W. C. (2011). The seduction of ethics: Transforming the social sciences. University of Toronto Press.
  49. Verma, N., Shiroma, K., Rich, K., Fleischmann, K. R., Xie, B., & Lee, M. K. (2021). Conducting quan- titative research with hard-to-reach-online populations: Using prime panels to rapidly survey older adults during a pandemic BT-diversity, divergence, dialogue. In K. Toeppe, H. Yan, & S. K. W. Chu (Eds.), International conference on information (pp. 384-393).
  50. Wood, A. J., Graham, M., Lehdonvirta, V., & Hjorth, I. (2019). Good gig, bad gig: Autonomy and algo- rithmic control in the global gig economy. Work, Employment and Society, 33(1), 56-75. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1177/ 09500 17018 785616
  51. Zuboff, S. (2019). The age of surveillance capitalism: The fight for a human future at the new frontier of power. Public Affairs.

Related papers

Will Work For Free: the biopolitics of unwaged digital labour
Brian A Brown

Abstract: This paper begins with a survey of the literature regarding a particular, yet ever more consequential and profitable, typology of digital labour: ‘free labour’ (Terranova, 2000, 2004), ‘unwaged immaterial labour’ (Brown and Quan Haase, 2012; Brown, 2013), and/or immaterial labour 2.0 (Coté & Pybus, 2007), to name a few of the more common terms. It then moves on to proffer a critical synthesis of this body of work so as to conclude with a much more theoretically nuanced definition of unwaged digital labour than that which has thus far been provided. In sum, the author argues that there are five central facets to unwaged digital labour that defines and differentiates it from its waged brethren. The first is that unwaged digital labour is fundamentally and inherently autonomous. Free of management oversight, the cooperative and creative capacities of content-generators produce massive amounts of digital artefacts that in the majority of cases also yield massive amounts of profit for the owners of Web 2.0 sites and services. The surplus value produced by this first facet refracts into the second. Following the work of Fuchs (2010, 2011, 2012, 2013), unwaged digital labour is (in the majority of circumstances) hyper-exploited. As has been argued elsewhere (Brown, 2013), this hyperexploitation is the primary cause for recurrent ‘user’ uproar on Web 2.0 sites and services. This kind of exploitation, then, is met with the third facet of digital labour considered herein: resistance or struggle. Facile recourse to nebulous conceptions regarding the invasion of one’s privacy on eminently social networks no longer suffices in explaining these instances of ‘user’ uproar. Thus, a more nuanced consideration of the forms of resistance that occur on social media sites and services is offered. Similar, yet different, to its waged genus, the fourth facet of unwaged digital labour is that it is intrinsically collaborative, cooperative, and generative of social relationships. The differences that obtain between the orientation of the social relationships constituted by waged and unwaged digital labour respectively are indicative of political potentials that have up until this point been under-theorized. Thus, building on the four aforementioned facets, as well as the arguments put forth by Hardt and Negri regarding the biopolitical dimensions of ‘immaterial labour’ (2000, 2004, 2009), the fifth and most theoretically provocative facet is that this kind of labour is inspired, guided, and regulated by a radically different amalgam of biopolitical power relationships that point to the potentials of a commons-based political economy existing beyond the hyper-exploitative dimensions of capital. Keywords: Unwaged Digital Labour, Free Labour, Immaterial Labour 2.0, New Media, Social Media, Autonomist Marxism, Biopolitics, Online Privacy.

View PDFchevron_right
Crowdwork, digital liminality and the enactment of culturally recognised alternatives to Western precarity: beyond epistemological <i>terra nullius</i>
Amany Elbanna

European Journal of Information Systems, 2021

Research on crowdwork in developing countries considers it precarious. This reproduces its Western conceptualisation assuming that crowdworkers in developing countries imitate their Western counterparts, without close examination of their experiences and responses to work conditions. This study breaks this epistemological terra nullius to pursue an in-depth examination of workers' lived experience in a developing country and provide a non-Western perspective. It questions how crowdworkers experience and respond to crowdwork and adopts an inductive approach in examining crowdworkers in Nigeria. Unlike the work precarity thesis, we find that crowdworkers in Nigeria transition and transform crowdwork into long-term employment, drawing on their own cultural heritage, social norms and traditions. Through the lens of the indigenous theory of liminality, we conceptualise crowdwork as liminal digital work and uncover three phases in this transformation process. The study concludes that the agency of workers, their culture and their own context play important roles in their experience of crowdwork. This demonstrates that the in-depth examination of the phenomenon in developing countries could destabilise the dominant knowledge, decoupling it from its origin of production and exposing and examining its implicit and explicit assumptions, and hence advance theorisation.

View PDFchevron_right
Crowdwork, digital liminality and the enactment of culturally recognised alternatives to Western precarity: beyond epistemological terra nullius
Amany Elbanna

European Journal of Information Systems

Research on crowdwork in developing countries considers it precarious. This reproduces its Western conceptualisation assuming that crowdworkers in developing countries imitate their Western counterparts, without close examination of their experiences and responses to work conditions. This study breaks this epistemological terra nullius to pursue an in-depth examination of workers' lived experience in a developing country and provide a non-Western perspective. It questions how crowdworkers experience and respond to crowdwork and adopts an inductive approach in examining crowdworkers in Nigeria. Unlike the work precarity thesis, we find that crowdworkers in Nigeria transition and transform crowdwork into long-term employment, drawing on their own cultural heritage, social norms and traditions. Through the lens of the indigenous theory of liminality, we conceptualise crowdwork as liminal digital work and uncover three phases in this transformation process. The study concludes that the agency of workers, their culture and their own context play important roles in their experience of crowdwork. This demonstrates that the in-depth examination of the phenomenon in developing countries could destabilise the dominant knowledge, decoupling it from its origin of production and exposing and examining its implicit and explicit assumptions, and hence advance theorisation.

View PDFchevron_right
Why does unpaid labour vary among digital labour platforms? Exploring socio-technical platform regimes of worker autonomy
Markieta Domecka

Human Relations, 2023

Digital platforms provide many workers with vital income and offer the promise of flexible work, and yet also contribute to experiences of precariousness and exploitation, particularly with regard to pressures to undertake unpaid work. This article explores why unpaid labour is necessary and what drives its extent and form among diverse types of digital platforms. We theorize two ideal types of 'open' and 'closed' socio-technical platform regimes of worker autonomy, building on sociological insights about sociotechnical systems, management control over worker autonomy and labour market segmentation by skill. In principle, 'open' ('closed') platform regimes grant relatively high (low) worker autonomy in terms of access to the platform, paid work and control over work tasks.

View PDFchevron_right
Between "World Class Work" and "Proletarianized Labor": Digital labor imaginaries in the global South
Jason Vincent Cabanes

This paper attempts to avoid both overly optimistic and pessimistic accounts of the ‘on-demand’ global economy and of ‘platform labor’ in the Global South. It instead considers both how the socio-cultural and economic complexities of the worker environment might drive the attractiveness of this form of labor and how histories of colonialism might make local employment and upward mobility less of a viable option for workers from the Global South. Drawing from in-depth interviews and analysis of multiple texts circulating in online freelance forums, Facebook groups, and ‘freelancer’ events, we look at how freelance workers and platform managers enacted and articulated classed and colonial digital labor imaginaries. We identify three such interconnected imaginaries and label them as follows: that of ‘distinction,’ ‘transcendence,’ and ‘flexibility’. In fleshing out these digital labor imaginaries, we discuss the role of virtual spaces, online communities, and the influencers who help push these imaginaries within the digital platform. And in exploring digital labor in the context of its socio-political and cultural embeddedness, we aim to show how workers constituted a sense of self and agency while being embedded in aspirations that were fraught at best and false at worst.

View PDFchevron_right

Related topics

  • Applied Ethics
  • Human Rights
    • 580 California St., Suite 400
    San Francisco, CA, 94104
    © 2025 Academia. All rights reserved