05/31 - Thingamabob Thursday!

Title: Make decisions and ratings--for iPhone/iPad users [ $ | $ ] PANDA
Requester: L Hackel [ABLF9XMJWEMUQ]
TurkerView: [ $15.46 / hour ]
Description: Make ratings and decisions. This survey is for people who own iPhones and/or iPads.
Duration: 02:00:00
Available: 0
Reward: $0.75
Qualifications:

• HIT approval rate (%) GreaterThan 95,
• Location EqualTo US,

[3CYDGW98NMQL988SXUTYW7L7K8QMOM]​

 

Also, has anyone actually gotten a bonus from L Hackel?

 

Stanford GSB Behavioral Lab [A3OSXTUM1QEXNY] Quick investment game - $0.30 | PANDA

[3ACJON8MIPK8IYPTP8UEHK6OZ0BEA3]​

[div] style="border: 1px solid transparent; padding: 10px 0; display: flex; align-items: center; border-color: #ecf0f1; box-shadow: 0 1px 1px rgba(0,0,0,0.05); text-align: center;" |
[div] style="float: left; width: 25%;" |
Fair[/div]
[div] style="float: left; width: 41%;" |[div] style="float: left; width: 50%;" |
Unrated[/div]
[div] style="float: left; width: 50%;" |
Unrated[/div][/div]
[div] style="float: left; width: 33%;" | $10.38 / hour
00:01:44 / completion time[/div]
[/div]

​

Pros:
One person will get $10
Cons:
It won't be you

To read Stanford GSB Behavioral Lab's full profile check out TurkerView!​

[div] style="display: none;" data-type="tv-review" data-revId="47461" data-reviewerId="157" |[/div]

 

@A6_Foul_Out

I got the same email you did and the rejection was overturned

 

Mauricio [A1OIK8JUWHMHM6] Evaluation of service - $0.40 | PANDA

[3BGEFHL0JHGYHMCFTS2SV9XHXEXJBM]​

[div] style="border: 1px solid transparent; padding: 10px 0; display: flex; align-items: center; border-color: #ecf0f1; box-shadow: 0 1px 1px rgba(0,0,0,0.05); text-align: center;" |
[div] style="float: left; width: 25%;" |
Fair[/div]
[div] style="float: left; width: 41%;" |[div] style="float: left; width: 50%;" |
Unrated[/div]
[div] style="float: left; width: 50%;" |
Unrated[/div][/div]
[div] style="float: left; width: 33%;" | $9.60 / hour
00:02:30 / completion time[/div]
[/div]

​

Pros:

Cons:
No code at the end

To read Mauricio's full profile check out TurkerView!​

[div] style="display: none;" data-type="tv-review" data-revId="47462" data-reviewerId="564" |[/div]

 

Title: Preferences Study(~ 15 minutes) [ $ | $ ] PANDA
Requester: Peter Wang [A2UAOQ8UH3TM8F]
TurkerView: [ $9.65 / hour ]
Description: We are interested in your preferences for different images. We also offer chances to win a $25 bonus in a raffle. Generally takes around 15 minutes.
Duration: 01:00:00
Available: 1
Reward: $1.00
Qualifications:

• Exc: [19-90594] DoesNotExist [ Request | How to Use ]
• Location In US,

[3TKKR4L4ZNOQHHC2V46X64P030KBAZ]​

 

Stanford GSB Behavioral Lab [A3OSXTUM1QEXNY] Quick investment game - $0.30 | PANDA

[3ACJON8MIPK8IYPTP8UEHK6OZ0BEA3]​

[div] style="border: 1px solid transparent; padding: 10px 0; display: flex; align-items: center; border-color: #ecf0f1; box-shadow: 0 1px 1px rgba(0,0,0,0.05); text-align: center;" |
[div] style="float: left; width: 25%;" |
Low[/div]
[div] style="float: left; width: 41%;" |[div] style="float: left; width: 50%;" |
Unrated[/div]
[div] style="float: left; width: 50%;" |
Unrated[/div][/div]
[div] style="float: left; width: 33%;" | $7.20 / hour
00:02:30 / completion time[/div]
[/div]

​

Pros:

Cons:
did the math, playing optimally is either futile or a waste of time.

only 1 10$ bonus for 1 top performer.

typical underpaid GSB

To read Stanford GSB Behavioral Lab's full profile check out TurkerView!​

[div] style="display: none;" data-type="tv-review" data-revId="47463" data-reviewerId="2251" |[/div]

 

Stanford GSB Behavioral Lab [A3OSXTUM1QEXNY] Quick investment game - $0.30 | PANDA

[3ACJON8MIPK8IYPTP8UEHK6OZ0BEA3]​

[div] style="border: 1px solid transparent; padding: 10px 0; display: flex; align-items: center; border-color: #ecf0f1; box-shadow: 0 1px 1px rgba(0,0,0,0.05); text-align: center;" |
[div] style="float: left; width: 25%;" |
Fair[/div]
[div] style="float: left; width: 41%;" |[div] style="float: left; width: 50%;" |
Unrated[/div]
[div] style="float: left; width: 50%;" |
Unrated[/div][/div]
[div] style="float: left; width: 33%;" | $7.25 / hour
00:02:29 / completion time[/div]
[/div]

​

Pros:

Cons:

To read Stanford GSB Behavioral Lab's full profile check out TurkerView!​

[div] style="display: none;" data-type="tv-review" data-revId="47464" data-reviewerId="1980" |[/div]

 

HFDM Lab [A2PMIMP32KBUMR] Take a survey about sequential decision making!! - $1.51 | PANDA

[3D7N1211P8NMM4B2O3CJQTHSY4NMAK]​

[div] style="border: 1px solid transparent; padding: 10px 0; display: flex; align-items: center; border-color: #ecf0f1; box-shadow: 0 1px 1px rgba(0,0,0,0.05); text-align: center;" |
[div] style="float: left; width: 25%;" |
Generous[/div]
[div] style="float: left; width: 41%;" |[div] style="float: left; width: 50%;" |
Unrated[/div]
[div] style="float: left; width: 50%;" |
Unrated[/div][/div]
[div] style="float: left; width: 33%;" | $15.18 / hour
00:05:58 / completion time[/div]
[/div]

​

Pros:

Cons:

To read HFDM Lab's full profile check out TurkerView!​

[div] style="display: none;" data-type="tv-review" data-revId="47465" data-reviewerId="188" |[/div]

 

yup if the AC was what @SamAnt said it was, that's bullshit and it shouldn't have been rejected.

But I feel that @ChrisTurk would disagree.

#RequesterShill4Life

 

Uh.. Yes? You answered wrong, what else is he supposed to do? Lol.

Just because the template was different from what you're used to doesn't change anything.. You weren't paying attention to the rating scale & answered the A/C incorrectly because of it.. that seems working as intended in my book.

Its semi-shitty, I'm glad he overturned it, but "by the book" thats pretty much the definition of an attention check. You're blowing through the survey b/c its the same shit you've done 800 times before yadda yadda that's great, sometimes it bites you.

 

if the scale wasn't on the screen and you had to go out of your way to find it that's pretty shitty design

 

Emphasis here. 'Cause yeah thats a pretty meaningless change.. its probably like barely a step above putting the A/C in the consent form or demographics page because really the scales have little effect on the answers numerically, but I can see it from his POV as being fair.

If the scale isn't on the screen & its bad design that's not an excuse to just not answer a question properly. Scroll back up?

 

.

 

woops I didn't mean to export that

 

I'd have to see it again tbh

but guess that's not going to happen.

 

Thanks for ruining my secret batch, ash hole.

 

Honestly those are pretty trash anyways. RIT has good master hits but those blah