Data Labeling QA, Bias & Instruction Clarity Audit
An operational audit survey for data labeling teams, measuring instruction clarity, bias mitigation practices, QA rigor, and workflow bottlenecks over the last 30 days. Designed for labelers, reviewers, and QA leads.
設問の例
テンプレートの内容をプレビューできます。すべての設問は公開前に自由に編集できます。
In the past 30 days, which of the following tasks have you performed? Select all that apply.
- Labeling / annotation
- Reviewing / QA
- Both labeling and reviewing
- Other (please specify)
Overall, how clear were the task instructions you received in the last 30 days?
Which of the following bias topics are covered in your current labeling guidelines? Select all that apply.
- Demographic bias (e.g., gender, race, age)
- Domain or jargon bias
- Geographic / vernacular variation
- Label leakage or proxy signals
- Harmful stereotypes and toxicity
- Context / translation bias
- None of the above
- Other (please specify)
How clear are the acceptance criteria used for reviewing labeled work?
Approximately what percentage of your labeled items were returned for rework in the last 30 days?
- 0%
- 1–5%
- 6–10%
- 11–20%
- 21–30%
- 31–50%
- More than 50%
- Not sure
If you could make one change to improve clarity, fairness, or quality assurance in your labeling work, what would it be?
What is your primary working region?
- North America
- Latin America
- Europe
- Middle East
- Africa
- South Asia
- East Asia
- Southeast Asia
- Oceania
- Prefer not to say
Thank you for completing this survey. Your feedback will directly inform improvements to instruction clarity, bias mitigation, and quality assurance processes.
How long have you worked on this labeling program?
- Less than 1 month
- 1–3 months
- 4–6 months
- 7–12 months
- 1–2 years
- More than 2 years
In the last 30 days, how often did task instructions change mid-project?
In the last 30 days, how often did you encounter inputs or labels that appeared biased?
Which review approach is used most often on your current program?
- Blind double review with adjudication
- Spot checks (fixed percentage)
- Heuristic-triggered review (rules-based)
- Peer review within team
- Self-review before submit
- Not sure
- Other (please specify)
From the list below, rank the top causes of rework you observed in the last 30 days, from most common to least common.
- Unclear or changing guidelines
- Reviewer–labeler disagreement
- Edge cases not covered
- Tooling or platform issues
- Time pressure or quotas
- Insufficient training or context
Based on your responses, we'd like to explore a few of your experiences in more depth. An AI moderator will ask you 1–2 follow-up questions about your labeling operations.
What is your primary working language?
- English
- Spanish
- Portuguese
- French
- German
- Chinese
- Japanese
- Korean
- Hindi
- Arabic
- Other (please specify)
- Prefer not to say
If you encountered any unclear or conflicting instructions in the last 30 days, please briefly describe one example. If none, you may skip this question.
When bias is suspected, how clear is the process for escalating the issue?
How useful was the review feedback you received in the last 30 days for improving your labeling accuracy?
Which of the following activities takes the largest share of your typical work week on this program?
- Labeling / annotation
- Review / QA
- Guideline reading / updating
- Meetings / syncs
- Training / onboarding
- Escalations or questions
- Other (please specify)
How much total experience do you have in data labeling or annotation?
- Less than 6 months
- 6–12 months
- 1–2 years
- 3–5 years
- 6+ years
If you encountered a potentially biased input or label recently, please briefly describe the example and how you handled it. If none, you may skip this question.
How timely was the review feedback you received in the last 30 days?
Which of the following tooling issues most slowed your quality or speed in the last 30 days? Select all that apply.
- Slow loading or lag
- Limited shortcuts or templates
- Poor diff / compare views
- Unclear error messages
- Hard to flag bias or edge cases
- Limited audit trail / metadata
- None of the above
- Other (please specify)
What is your employment type on this program?
- Full-time
- Part-time
- Contract / Freelance
- Prefer not to say
含まれる機能
AIによる深掘り
自由回答に合わせてAIが追加で質問し、固定のフォームでは拾えない具体的な内容を引き出します。
注意確認設問
急いだ回答や質の低い回答者を除外する仕組みを標準で備えています。
AIが作成する設問文
文言、設問の順序、条件分岐をAIが調査の目的に合わせて作成します。
自動レポート
回答が集まると、テーマ、引用、わかりやすい要約が自動で作成されます。
よくあるご質問
「Data Labeling QA, Bias & Instruction Clarity Audit」テンプレートにはどのような設問が含まれていますか?
すぐに使える設問が25問含まれており、最初の設問は次のとおりです:「Welcome! This survey takes about 11 minutes and asks about your data labeling work over the last 30 days. Your participa…」・「In the past 30 days, which of the following tasks have you performed? Select all that apply.」・「Overall, how clear were the task instructions you received in the last 30 days?」。すべての設問は上でプレビューでき、自由に編集できます。
このアンケートの回答にはどのくらい時間がかかりますか?
回答者は通常、25問を約11分で回答し終えます。
テンプレートは編集できますか?
はい。公開前であれば、すべての設問、選択肢、順序を編集できます。設問の追加や削除のほか、調査の目的に合わせた作り直しをAIエディターに依頼することもできます。
このテンプレートは無料で使えますか?
はい。エディターで開けば、すぐに編集を始められます。お試しにアカウントは不要で、無料プランでアンケートを公開できます。
公開の準備はできましたか?
このテンプレートをエディターで開いてみてください。最初の回答者が目にする前に、すべてを自由に変更できます。
関連テンプレート
似たテーマのほかの調査もご覧ください。