Abstract
AbstractIn the past decade, crowdworking on online labor market platforms has become an important source of income for a growing number of people worldwide. This development has led to increasing political and scholarly interest in the wages people can earn on such platforms. This study extends the literature, which is often based on a single platform, region, or category of crowdworking, through a meta-analysis of prevalent hourly wages. After a systematic literature search, the paper considers 22 primary empirical studies, including 105 wages and 76,765 data points from 22 platforms, eight different countries, and 10 years. It is found that, on average, microtasks results in an hourly wage of less than $6. This wage is significantly lower than the mean wage of online freelancers, which is roughly three times higher when not factoring in unpaid work. Hourly wages accounting for unpaid work, such as searching for tasks and communicating with requesters, tend to be significantly lower than wages not considering unpaid work. Legislators and researchers evaluating wages in crowdworking need to be aware of this bias when assessing hourly wages, given that the majority of literature does not account for the effect of unpaid work time on crowdworking wages. To foster the comparability of different research results, the article suggests that scholars consider a wage correction factor to account for unpaid work. Finally, researchers should be aware that remuneration and work processes on crowdworking platforms can systematically affect the data collection method and inclusion of unpaid work.
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Reference144 articles.
1. Adams A, Berg J (2017) When home affects pay: an analysis of the gender pay gap among crowdworkers. SSRN Electron J. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3048711
2. Agrawal A, Horton J, Lacetera N, Lyons E (2015) Digitization and the contract labor market: a research agenda. In: Goldfarb A et al (eds) Economic analysis of the digital economy. National Bureau of Economic Research conference report. University of Chicago Press, Chicago
3. Ahmed I, Sutton AJ, Riley RD (2012) Assessment of publication bias, selection bias, and unavailable data in meta-analyses using individual participant data: a database survey. BMJ (clin Res Edn). https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.d7762
4. Aleksynska M, Bastrakova A, Kharchenko N (2019) Working conditions on digital labour platforms: evidence from a leading labour supply economy. IZA Discuss Pap. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3390235
5. Aloisi A (2015) Commoditized workers the rising of on-demand work, a case study research on a set of online platforms and apps. SSRN Electron J. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2637485
Cited by
11 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献