"I can show what I really like.": Eliciting Preferences via Quadratic Voting
Ti-Chung Cheng, Tiffany Wenting Li, Yi-Hung Chou, Karrie Karahalios, Hari Sundaram
Abstract
Surveys are a common instrument to gauge self-reported opinions from the crowd for scholars in the CSCW community, the social sciences, and many other research areas. Researchers often use surveys to prioritize a subset of given options when there are resource constraints. Over the past century, researchers have developed a wide range of surveying techniques, including one of the most popular instruments, the Likert ordinal scale [49], to elicit individual preferences. However, the challenge to elicit accurate and rich self-reported responses with surveys in a resource-constrained context still persists today. In this study, we examine Quadratic Voting (QV), a voting mechanism powered by the affordances of a modern computer and straddles ratings and rankings approaches [64], as an alternative online survey technique. We argue that QV could elicit more accurate self-reported responses compared to the Likert scale when the goal is to understand relative preferences under resource constraints. We conducted two randomized controlled experiments on Amazon Mechanical Turk, one in the context of public opinion polling and the other in a human-computer interaction user study. Based on our Bayesian analysis results, a QV survey with a sufficient amount of voice credits, aligned significantly closer to participants' incentive-compatible behaviors than a Likert scale survey, with a medium to high effect size. In addition, we extended QV's application scenario from typical public policy and education research to a problem setting familiar to the CSCW community: a prototypical HCI user study. Our experiment results, QV survey design, and QV interface serve as a stepping stone for CSCW researchers to further explore this surveying methodology in their studies and encourage decision-makers from other communities to consider QV as a promising alternative.
CCS Concepts: • Human-centered computing → Empirical studies in collaborative and social computing; Collaborative and social computing design and evaluation methods; HCI design and evaluation methods.
Ask about this paper
Your agent reads all of it.
Lune indexed this paper to the last equation, along with the top-tier papers that cite it. Ask a question and the answer quotes them.
Your agent calls
Luneget_paper_fulltext
Free to start. No credit card required.
Terminal
Install the CLIlune papers fulltext 72bb1bbe-ce1b-4fb0-855d-b9c986ce7d16Cited by top-tier papers1
Ask how each one uses itRelated papers
- Dynamic Surveys: Using LLMs to Blend Qualitative Depth, Quantitative Structure, and Collaborative InteractionKehua Lei, Aidan Ladenburg, Zahra Kais Petiwala, Zili Wang et al.CSCW 2025
- Understanding How to Administer Voice Surveys through Smart SpeakersJing Wei, Weiwei Jiang, Chaofan Wang, Difeng Yu et al.CSCW 2022 · 9 citations
- Does a Picture Paint a Thousand Words? Using Visual and Textual Channels to Understand Attitudes and BeliefsShiyao Li, Roshini Deva, Arpit Narechania, Alireza Karduni et al.CHI 2026 · 1 citation
- QButterfly: Lightweight Survey Extension for Online User Interaction Studies for Non-Tech-Savvy ResearchersNico Ebert, Björn Scheppler, Kurt Alexander Ackermann, Tim GeppertCHI 2023 · 7 citations
- The Surprising Effectiveness of SP Voting with Partial PreferencesHadi Hosseini, Debmalya Mandal, Amrit PuhanNeurIPS 2024 · 5 citations
