Crowdsourcing Downunder

Rachel Hendery, J. Gibson
{"title":"Crowdsourcing Downunder","authors":"Rachel Hendery, J. Gibson","doi":"10.5334/kula.52","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In this paper we report on the experience of two research projects that intended to experiment with crowdsourcing models for opening up their scholarly materials to the wider public. Both the Howitt & Fison project, and Mapping Print; Charting Enlightenment were designed to take into consideration particularities of the Australian academic environment: in the former case, sensitivities around materials relating to First Peoples; in both cases, geographical distance from potentially interested communities, and the difficulties of formal recognition and categorisation of time spent on activities that lie at the intersection of research and outreach. They had similar challenges in terms of needing to process a large amount of data before analysis and progress towards the projects’ main research goals could begin. They also had similar goals in terms of eventual use of the project data, for example, making historical texts available online, and producing maps, networks, timelines and digital exhibitions of images and texts. In the end, one project has found crowdsourcing invaluable for building connections with interested publics the other discovered that crowdsourcing was not necessary to produce the results the project needed, and has moved away from this to focus its efforts instead on the linking of existing data and automation of structuring and categorisation. This paper discusses how the projects came to take these different directions, and how the above-mentioned Australian contexts contributed to their evolution.","PeriodicalId":425221,"journal":{"name":"KULA: Knowledge Creation, Dissemination, and Preservation Studies","volume":"301 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-02-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"KULA: Knowledge Creation, Dissemination, and Preservation Studies","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5334/kula.52","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

In this paper we report on the experience of two research projects that intended to experiment with crowdsourcing models for opening up their scholarly materials to the wider public. Both the Howitt & Fison project, and Mapping Print; Charting Enlightenment were designed to take into consideration particularities of the Australian academic environment: in the former case, sensitivities around materials relating to First Peoples; in both cases, geographical distance from potentially interested communities, and the difficulties of formal recognition and categorisation of time spent on activities that lie at the intersection of research and outreach. They had similar challenges in terms of needing to process a large amount of data before analysis and progress towards the projects’ main research goals could begin. They also had similar goals in terms of eventual use of the project data, for example, making historical texts available online, and producing maps, networks, timelines and digital exhibitions of images and texts. In the end, one project has found crowdsourcing invaluable for building connections with interested publics the other discovered that crowdsourcing was not necessary to produce the results the project needed, and has moved away from this to focus its efforts instead on the linking of existing data and automation of structuring and categorisation. This paper discusses how the projects came to take these different directions, and how the above-mentioned Australian contexts contributed to their evolution.
众包人间天堂吧
在本文中,我们报告了两个研究项目的经验,这两个项目旨在试验众包模式,向更广泛的公众开放他们的学术材料。Howitt & Fison项目和Mapping Print;制图启蒙的设计考虑到澳大利亚学术环境的特殊性:在前者的情况下,与第一民族有关的材料的敏感性;在这两种情况下,与潜在感兴趣的社区的地理距离,以及在研究和推广交叉的活动上花费的时间的正式承认和分类的困难。他们面临着类似的挑战,需要在开始分析和实现项目主要研究目标之前处理大量数据。他们在项目数据的最终使用方面也有类似的目标,例如,使历史文本在网上可用,并制作地图、网络、时间表和图像和文本的数字展览。最后,一个项目发现众包在与感兴趣的公众建立联系方面是非常宝贵的,而另一个项目发现众包对于产生项目所需的结果是不必要的,并且已经离开了这一点,转而将精力集中在现有数据的链接以及结构和分类的自动化上。本文讨论了这些项目是如何走向这些不同的方向的,以及上述澳大利亚的背景如何促成了它们的演变。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信