The DOI matches its Crossref record; 35 of the 36 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
The winners and the losers of the platform economy: who participates?
Abstract
The platform economy is rapidly transforming the dynamics of the labor market. Optimists argue platform work functions as a social equalizer, opening opportunities for additional earnings for those who need it most. Pessimists suggest that the platform economy widens earning disparities by providing additional income to people who already have good jobs. We contribute to this debate by examining who participates in the platform economy and their motivation for participation, using a US nationally representative sample. Our findings offer support for both perspectives. Those who participated in labor-exchange platforms were more likely to come from disadvantaged backgrounds. By contrast, those who participated in online selling platforms were more likely to come from more affluent backgrounds. When we further examined different types of platform work, we found that different types of platform work were performed by different demographic and social groups. In addition, participation in some platform work, such as rideshare driving and house/laundry cleaning, is motivated out of necessity, while other platform work, such as selling used goods and performing online tasks, is generally used to supplement incomes. Distinct occupations tend to benefit different social groups in different ways and, taken together, disadvantaged groups are less likely to perform types of platform work that would improve their economic position and reduce income disparities. This tends to offer more support for the pessimist’s perspective. We conclude that the platform economy is strongly segregated by occupation and it should be examined as a set of distinct occupations rather than a homogenous industry.
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
In the citing paper
“Working on digital labor platforms provides an easily accessible source of employment income (e.g., Alif et al., 2020;Churchill & Craig, 2019;Hoang et al., 2020).”
From Gig work and gig workers: An integrative review and agenda for future research (2024) · cites this paper as Hoang et al., 2020
Citations
Cites
Issues in Science and Technology
National Research Council (2000) · National Academies Press eBooks · doi:10.17226/892 · Cited by 1,430
Graham, M., Hjorth, I., & Lehdonvirta, V. (2017) · Transfer: European Review of Labour and Research · doi:10.1177/1024258916687250 · Cited by 1,089
van Doorn, N. (2017) · Information, Communication & Society · doi:10.1080/1369118x.2017.1294194 · Cited by 941
OECD Economics Department Working Papers
OECD, & OECD (2010) · OECD Economics Department working papers · doi:10.1787/18151973 · Cited by 897
Fuchs, C. (2014) · doi:10.4324/9781315880075 · Cited by 853
A review of Internet use among older adults
Hunsaker, A., & Hargittai, E. (2018) · New Media & Society · doi:10.1177/1461444818787348 · Cited by 770
An Analysis of the Labor Market for Uber’s Driver-Partners in the United States
Hall, J. V., & Krueger, A. B. (2018) · ILR Review · doi:10.1177/0019793917717222 · Cited by 701
Charles, M., & Grusky, D. B. (2004) · Stanford University Press eBooks · doi:10.1515/9781503618183 · Cited by 570
Regulating work in the gig economy: What are the options?
Stewart, A., & Stanford, J. (2017) · The Economic and Labour Relations Review · doi:10.1177/1035304617722461 · Cited by 564
Flexibility in the gig economy: managing time on three online piecework platforms
Lehdonvirta, V. (2018) · New Technology, Work and Employment · doi:10.1111/ntwe.12102 · Cited by 550
Sex Segregation in the Workplace
Reskin, B. F. (1993) · Annual Review of Sociology · doi:10.1146/annurev.so.19.080193.001325 · Cited by 546
Haight, M., Quan‐Haase, A., & Corbett, B. A. (2014) · Information Communication & Society · doi:10.1080/1369118x.2014.891633 · Cited by 438
Self-citationDigital inequalities in the age of artificial intelligence and big data
Lutz, C. (2019) · Human Behavior and Emerging Technologies · doi:10.1002/hbe2.140 · Cited by 411
Old Dogs, New Clicks: Digital Inequality in Skills and Uses among Older Adults
Hargittai, E., & Dobransky, K. (2017) · Canadian Journal of Communication · doi:10.22230/cjc.2017v42n2a3176 · Cited by 351 · cited 1×
“Research across the globe has also demonstrated that younger adults are more likely to be online, to engage in more types of activities, and to have greater skills (Hargittai & Dobransky, 2017; Hunsaker & Hargittai, 2018; Quan-Haase, Williams, Kicevski, Elueze, & Wellman, 2018).”
Schor, J. B. (2016) · Cambridge Journal of Regions Economy and Society · doi:10.1093/cjres/rsw047 · Cited by 348
Dimensions of Internet use: amount, variety, and types
Blank, G., & Grošelj, D. (2014) · Information Communication & Society · doi:10.1080/1369118x.2014.889189 · Cited by 325
Self-citationThe Global Platform Economy: A New Offshoring Institution Enabling Emerging-Economy Microproviders
Lehdonvirta, V., kässi, O., Hjorth, I., Barnard, H. C., & Graham, M. (2018) · Journal of Management · doi:10.1177/0149206318786781 · Cited by 317
Quan‐Haase, A., Williams, C., Kicevski, M., Elueze, I. N., & Wellman, B. (2018) · American Behavioral Scientist · doi:10.1177/0002764218777572 · Cited by 277
Self-citationShould we take the gig economy seriously?
Healy, J., Nicholson, D., & Pekarek, A. (2017) · Labour & Industry a journal of the social and economic relations of work · doi:10.1080/10301763.2017.1377048 · Cited by 247
Sharing economy workers: selling, not sharing
Ravenelle, A. J. (2016) · Cambridge Journal of Regions Economy and Society · doi:10.1093/cjres/rsw043 · Cited by 226
Peticca‐Harris, A., deGama, N., & Ravishankar, M. (2020) · Organization · doi:10.1177/1350508418757332 · Cited by 215
The Sexual Orientation Wage Gap: The Role of Occupational Sorting and Human Capital
Antecol, H., Jong, A., & Steinberger, M. D. (2008) · Industrial and Labor Relations Review · doi:10.1177/001979390806100405 · Cited by 212
The Rise of the “Gig Economy” and Implications for Understanding Work and Workers
Kuhn, K. M. (2016) · Industrial and Organizational Psychology · doi:10.1017/iop.2015.129 · Cited by 210
Costa, G. M., & de Melo, M. G. P. (2017) · Routledge eBooks · doi:10.4324/9781315628127-2 · Cited by 209
Concealable Stigma and Occupational Segregation
Tilcsik, A., Anteby, M., & Knight, C. R. (2015) · Administrative Science Quarterly · doi:10.1177/0001839215576401 · Cited by 208
Ayres, I., Banaji, M. R., & Jolls, C. (2015) · The RAND Journal of Economics · doi:10.1111/1756-2171.12115 · Cited by 119
Computer-Supported Cooperative Work (CSCW)
(2017) · CRC Press eBooks · doi:10.1081/e-elis4-120043882 · Cited by 106
In search of an adequate European policy response to the platform economy
Fabo, B., Karanović, J., & Dukova, K. (2017) · Transfer European Review of Labour and Research · doi:10.1177/1024258916688861 · Cited by 94
Gig Work, Online Selling and Home Sharing
Smith, A. C. T. (2016) · Cited by 80
Rating Working Conditions on Digital Labor Platforms
Harmon, E., & Silberman, M. ‘. (2018) · Computer Supported Cooperative Work (CSCW) · doi:10.1007/s10606-018-9313-5 · Cited by 73
Huws, U. E., Spencer, N. H., & Joyce, S. (2016) · University of Hertfordshire Research Archive (University of Hertfordshire) · Cited by 72
Collective action and provider classification in the sharing economy
Newlands, G., Lutz, C., & Fieseler, C. (2018) · New Technology Work and Employment · doi:10.1111/ntwe.12119 · Cited by 63
The digital economy and its implications for labour. 1. The platform economy
Drahokoupil, J., & Jepsen, M. (2017) · Transfer European Review of Labour and Research · doi:10.1177/1024258917701380 · Cited by 51
Occupational self-selection in a labor market with moral hazard
Demiralp, B. (2010) · European Economic Review · doi:10.1016/j.euroecorev.2010.07.005 · Cited by 6
Regulating Work in the 'Gig Economy'Preprint
Riley, J. (2017) · SSRN Electronic Journal · Cited by 6
Research works printed but not linked: 6
- Dittrich P., 2018, Jacques Delors Institut, 227, 1
- Evans P., 2016, The rise of the platform entreprise
- Huws U., 2016, FEPS Studies, 1
- Smith A., 2016, Gig work, online selling and homesharing
- Smith T., 2019, General social survey, 2016
- Wilkinson R., 2010, The spirit level
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Sharma, M., Luthra, S., Joshi, S. K., & Kumar, A., V (2020) · International Journal of Logistics Research and Applications · doi:10.1080/13675567.2020.1810213 · Cited by 284
Gig work and gig workers: An integrative review and agenda for future research
Wu, D., & Huang, J. L. (2024) · Journal of Organizational Behavior · doi:10.1002/job.2775 · Cited by 168
New tech, old exploitation: Gig economy, algorithmic control and migrant labour
Lata, L. N., Burdon, J., & Reddel, T. (2022) · Sociology Compass · doi:10.1111/soc4.13028 · Cited by 165
The Interaction between Internet, Sustainable Development, and Emergence of Society 5.0
Roblek, V., Meško, M., Bach, M. P., Thorpe, O., & Šprajc, P. (2020) · Data · doi:10.3390/data5030080 · Cited by 127
Gender and precarity in platform work: Old inequalities in the new world of work
Gerber, C. (2022) · New Technology Work and Employment · doi:10.1111/ntwe.12233 · Cited by 99
Metadata
- Authors
- Hoang, L., Blank, G., & Quan-Haase, A.
- Affiliations
- Western University (CA)
- University of Oxford (GB)
- Department of Sociology, University of Western Ontario, London, ON, Canada
- Corresponding author
- Hoang, Lyn
- Venue
- Information, Communication & Society
- Publisher
- Informa UK Limited
- Published
- 2020-02-04
- Volume
- 23
- Issue
- 5
- Pages
- 681-700
- ISSN
- 1369-118X (ISSN-L)
- 1468-4462
- OpenAlex
- W3004635479
- Cited by
- 113
- References
- 36
- Citations by year
- 2026: 9 · 2025: 17 · 2024: 28 · 2023: 20 · 2022: 23 · 2021: 11 · 2020: 5
- FWCI
- 19.69
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Information Communication & Society (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Digital Economy and Work Transformation
- Social Sciences › Economics, Econometrics and Finance › Economics and Econometrics › Labor market dynamics and wage inequality
- Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Strategy and Management › Digital Platforms and Economics
- Keywords
- platform economy, platform work, labor force participation, income inequality, occupational segregation, participation motivation
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review