Co-utility pp 189-200 | Cite as

The Need of Co-utility for Successful Crowdsourcing

  • Enrique Estellés-ArolasEmail author
Part of the Studies in Systems, Decision and Control book series (SSDC, volume 110)


Technological development has promoted the rise and use of the collective intelligence through Internet. To efficiently handle this collective intelligence, several processes have naturally emerged. Crowdsourcing is one of them. By using crowdsourcing, the undertaking of a task can be proposed by a person or organization to the crowd that composes Internet. Although these proposed tasks could vary in their requirements for successful accomplishment, any crowdsourcing initiative always includes different benefits for the promoters of the initiatives and one or more rewards for each person of the crowd. These rewards play a key role because their evaluation by the crowd will condition the number, the interest and the implication of participants in the initiative. To design and model the interaction between the crowd and the initiative promoter, game theory appears as a suitable tool. In this chapter, the close relationship between crowdsourcing and co-utility, a type of collaborative interaction defined in terms of game theory, will be studied. It will be shown that one of the easiest ways to achieve successful crowdsourcing initiatives is to give them a co-utile configuration.


  1. 1.
    Banks, J., Potts, J.: Co-creating games: a co-evolutionary analysis. New Media Soc. 12(2):253–270.(2010)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Bigham, J.P., Bernstein, M.S., Adar, E.: Human-computer interaction and collective intelligence. In: Malone, W., Bernstein, M.S. (eds.) Handbook of Collective Intelligence. MIT Press, Cambridge (2015)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Brabham, D.C.: Crowdsourcing as a model for problem solving an introduction and cases. Converg. Int. J. Res. New Media Technol. 14(1):75–90 (2008)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Brabham, D.C.: Crowdsourcing. MIT Press, Cambridge (2013)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Chawla, S., Hartline, J.D., Sivan, B.: Optimal crowdsourcing contests. Games Econom. Behav. (2015)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Chesbrough, H.W.: Open Innovation: The New Imperative for Creating and Profiting from Technology. Harvard Business Press, Verlag (2006). (Colman, A.M.: Game Theory and Its Applications: In the Social and Biological Sciences. Psychology Press, Boston (2013))Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    DiPalantino, D., Vojnovic, M.: Crowdsourcing and all-pay auctions. In: Proceedings of the 10th ACM Conference on Electronic Commerce, pp. 119–128. ACM, New York (2009)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Domingo-Ferrer, J., Martínez, S., Sánchez, D., Soria-Comas, J.: Co-utility: self-enforcing protocols for the mutual benefit of participant. Eng. Appl. Artif. Intell. 59, 148–158 (2017)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Domingo-Ferrer, J., Sánchez, D., Soria-Comas, J.: Co-utility: self-enforcing collaborative protocols with mutual help. Prog. Artif. Intell. 5(2):105–110 (2016)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Dugatkin, L.A., Reeve, H.K. (eds.): Game Theory and Animal Behavior. Oxford University Press, Oxford (2000)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Estellés-Arolas, E., González-Ladrón-de-Guevara, F.: Towards an integrated crowdsourcing definition. J. Inf. Sci. 38(2), 189–200 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Estellés-Arolas, E., Navarro-Giner, R., González-Ladrón-de-Guevara, F.: Crowdsourcing fundamentals: definition and typology. In: Advances in Crowdsourcing, pp. 33–48. Springer International Publishing, Berlin (2015)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Geiger, D., Seedorf, S., Schulze, T., Nickerson, R.C., Schader, M.: Managing the crowd: towards a taxonomy of crowdsourcing processes. In: Proceedings of the Seventeenth Americas Conference on Information Systems, Detroit, Michigan, 4–7 Aug 2011Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Ghosh, A.: Game theory and incentives in human computation systems. In: Handbook of Human Computation, pp. 725–742. Springer, New York (2013)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Ho, C.J., Chen, K.T.: On formal models for social verification. In: Proceedings of the ACM SIGKDD Workshop on Human Computation, pp. 62–69. ACM, Boston (2009)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Ho, C.J., Chang, T.H., Hsu, J.Y.J.: Photoslap: a multi-player online game for semantic annotation. In: Proceedings of the National Conference on Artificial Intelligence, vol. 22, No. 2, p. 1359 (2007)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Howe, J.: The rise of crowdsourcing. Wired 14(6), 1–4 (2006)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Howe, J.: Crowdsourcing: How the Power of the Crowd is Driving the Future of Business. Random House, New York (2008)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Jain, S., Parkes, D.C.: The role of game theory in human computation systems. In: Proceedings of the ACM SIGKDD Workshop on Human Computation, pp. 58–61. ACM, Boston (2009)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Jiang, L., Wagner, C., Nardi, B.: Not just in it for the money: a qualitative investigation of workers’ perceived benefits of micro-task crowdsourcing. In: 2015 48th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (HICSS), pp. 773–782. IEEE, New York (2015)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Larson, M., Cremonesi, P., Said, A., Tikk, D., Shi, Y., Karatzoglou, A.: Activating the crowd: exploiting user-item reciprocity for recommendation. In: The First Workshop on Crowdsourcing and Human Computation for Recommender Systems, ACM Conference Series on Recommender Systems, ACM RECSYS (2013)Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Leyton-Brown, K., Shoham, Y.: Essentials of game theory: a concise multidisciplinary introduction. Synth. Lect. Artif. Intell. Mach. Learn. 2(1),1–88 (2008)Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Malone, T.W., Laubacher, R., Dellarocas, C.: The collective intelligence genome. MIT Sloan Manag. Rev. 51(3):21 (2010)Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Manshaei, M.H., Zhu, Q., Alpcan, T., Bacşar, T., Hubaux, J.P.: Game theory meets network security and privacy. ACM Comput. Surv. 45(3),25 (2013)Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Muggy, L., Heier Stamm, J.L.: Game theory applications in humanitarian operations: a review. J. Humanit. Logist. Supply Chain Manag. 4(1),4–23 (2014)Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Naroditskiy, V., Jennings, N.R., Van Hentenryck, P., Cebrian, M.: Crowdsourcing contest dilemma. J. R. Soc. Interface 11(99) (2014)Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Oomen, J. Aroyo, L.: Crowdsourcing in the cultural heritage domain: opportunities and challenges. In: Proceedings of 5th International Conference on Communities Technologies – C&T. Queensland University of Technology, Brisbane, Australia, 29 June–2 July 2011Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    O’Reilly, T.: What is Web 2.0: Design patterns and business models for the next generation of software. Commun. Strat. 1:17 (2007)Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Sambuli, N., Crandall, A., Costello, P., Orwa, C.: Viability, verification, validity: 3Vs of crowdsourcing. iHub Research (2013)Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Turi, A.N., Domingo-Ferrer, J., Sánchez, D., Osmani, D.: Co-utility: conciliating individual freedom and common good in the crowd based business model. In: 2015 IEEE 12th International Conference on e-Business Engineering (ICEBE), (pp. 62–67) (2015)Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Turi, A.N., Domingo-Ferrer, J., Sánchez, D., Osmani, D.: A co-utility approach to the mesh economy: the crowd-based business model. Rev. Manag. Sci. 1–32 (2016)Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    von Ahn, L.: Games with a purpose. Computer 39(92–94), 2006 (2006)Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Wu, W., Tsai, W.T., Li, W.: An evaluation framework for software crowdsourcing. Front. Comput. Sci. 7(5),694–709 (2013)Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    Wu, W., Tsai, W.T., Hu, Z., Wu, Y.: Towards a game theoretical model for software crowdsourcing processes. In: Crowdsourcing, pp. 143–161. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg (2015)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Catholic University of Valencia San Vicente MártirValenciaSpain

Personalised recommendations