Beyond Fair Pay: Ethical Implications of NLP Crowdsourcing

Abstract

The use of crowdworkers in NLP research is growing rapidly, in tandem with the exponential increase in research production in machine learning and AI. Ethical discussion regarding the use of crowdworkers within the NLP research community is typically confined in scope to issues related to labor conditions such as fair pay. We draw attention to the lack of ethical considerations related to the various tasks performed by workers, including labeling, evaluation, and production. We find that the Final Rule, the common ethical framework used by researchers, did not anticipate the use of online crowdsourcing platforms for data collection, resulting in gaps between the spirit and practice of human-subjects ethics in NLP research. We enumerate common scenarios where crowdworkers performing NLP tasks are at risk of harm. We thus recommend that researchers evaluate these risks by considering the three ethical principles set up by the Belmont Report. We also clarify some common misconceptions regarding the Institutional Review Board (IRB) application. We hope this paper will serve to reopen the discussion within our community regarding the ethical use of crowdworkers.

To be published in NAACL-HLT 2021. 12 pages, 1 figure, 3 tables

References in corpus (1)

• Quality Control in Crowdsourcing: A Survey of Quality Attributes, Assessment Techniques and Assurance Actions

Cited by in corpus (6)

• CrowdWorkSheets: Accounting for Individual and Collective Identities Underlying Crowdsourced Dataset Annotation
• The illusion of artificial inclusion
• Human participants in AI research: Ethics and transparency in practice
• Augmenting semantic lexicons using word embeddings and transfer learning
• Prompting in the Dark: Assessing Human Performance in Prompt Engineering for Data Labeling When Gold Labels Are Absent
• ConvAbuse: Data, Analysis, and Benchmarks for Nuanced Abuse Detection in Conversational AI