将原生数字用户的方法多样性概念化:来自垃圾桶模型的见解

IF 4.7 Q2 COMPUTER SCIENCE, ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE
Adam Nix, Stephanie Decker, David A. Kirsch
{"title":"将原生数字用户的方法多样性概念化:来自垃圾桶模型的见解","authors":"Adam Nix,&nbsp;Stephanie Decker,&nbsp;David A. Kirsch","doi":"10.1007/s00146-025-02229-6","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>The benefits of AI technologies in archival preservation are well recognised, though questions remain about their integration into existing processes. AI also shows promise for enhancing user experience and discovery in accessing born-digital materials. However, a limited understanding of the diverse methodological needs surrounding born-digital access risks the creation of one-size-fits-all solutions that suit certain approaches and research questions better than others. This article reviews current efforts in born-digital access and applies the Garbage Can Model from organisation theory to conceptualise the challenge of developing AI-based tools for multiple user types, highlighting the iterative and often decentralised nature of multi-stakeholder decision-making. We address this challenge by creating four born-digital archival user types—the aggregator, the synthesiser, the fact finder, and the narrator—each with distinct motivations and research approaches. Finally, we identify some new opportunities for stakeholders to inform how AI-based tools can be developed to better meet the variety of methodological needs that exist in relation to born-digital archives.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":47165,"journal":{"name":"AI & Society","volume":"40 6","pages":"4499 - 4511"},"PeriodicalIF":4.7000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007/s00146-025-02229-6.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Conceptualising methodological diversity among born-digital users: insights from the garbage can model\",\"authors\":\"Adam Nix,&nbsp;Stephanie Decker,&nbsp;David A. Kirsch\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s00146-025-02229-6\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><p>The benefits of AI technologies in archival preservation are well recognised, though questions remain about their integration into existing processes. AI also shows promise for enhancing user experience and discovery in accessing born-digital materials. However, a limited understanding of the diverse methodological needs surrounding born-digital access risks the creation of one-size-fits-all solutions that suit certain approaches and research questions better than others. This article reviews current efforts in born-digital access and applies the Garbage Can Model from organisation theory to conceptualise the challenge of developing AI-based tools for multiple user types, highlighting the iterative and often decentralised nature of multi-stakeholder decision-making. We address this challenge by creating four born-digital archival user types—the aggregator, the synthesiser, the fact finder, and the narrator—each with distinct motivations and research approaches. Finally, we identify some new opportunities for stakeholders to inform how AI-based tools can be developed to better meet the variety of methodological needs that exist in relation to born-digital archives.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":47165,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"AI & Society\",\"volume\":\"40 6\",\"pages\":\"4499 - 4511\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-03-06\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007/s00146-025-02229-6.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"AI & Society\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s00146-025-02229-6\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"COMPUTER SCIENCE, ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"AI & Society","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s00146-025-02229-6","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"COMPUTER SCIENCE, ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

人工智能技术在档案保存方面的好处得到了广泛认可,尽管它们与现有流程的整合仍存在问题。人工智能还显示出在访问原生数字材料时增强用户体验和发现的希望。然而,对原生数字访问的各种方法需求的理解有限,可能会产生适合某些方法和研究问题的“一刀切”解决方案。本文回顾了当前在原生数字访问方面的努力,并应用组织理论中的垃圾桶模型来概念化为多种用户类型开发基于人工智能的工具所面临的挑战,强调了多利益相关者决策的迭代性和分散性。为了应对这一挑战,我们创建了四种天生的数字档案用户类型——聚合者、综合者、事实发现者和叙述者——每一种都有不同的动机和研究方法。最后,我们为利益相关者确定了一些新的机会,告知如何开发基于人工智能的工具,以更好地满足与出生数字档案相关的各种方法需求。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Conceptualising methodological diversity among born-digital users: insights from the garbage can model

The benefits of AI technologies in archival preservation are well recognised, though questions remain about their integration into existing processes. AI also shows promise for enhancing user experience and discovery in accessing born-digital materials. However, a limited understanding of the diverse methodological needs surrounding born-digital access risks the creation of one-size-fits-all solutions that suit certain approaches and research questions better than others. This article reviews current efforts in born-digital access and applies the Garbage Can Model from organisation theory to conceptualise the challenge of developing AI-based tools for multiple user types, highlighting the iterative and often decentralised nature of multi-stakeholder decision-making. We address this challenge by creating four born-digital archival user types—the aggregator, the synthesiser, the fact finder, and the narrator—each with distinct motivations and research approaches. Finally, we identify some new opportunities for stakeholders to inform how AI-based tools can be developed to better meet the variety of methodological needs that exist in relation to born-digital archives.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
AI & Society
AI & Society COMPUTER SCIENCE, ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE-
CiteScore
8.00
自引率
20.00%
发文量
257
期刊介绍: AI & Society: Knowledge, Culture and Communication, is an International Journal publishing refereed scholarly articles, position papers, debates, short communications, and reviews of books and other publications. Established in 1987, the Journal focuses on societal issues including the design, use, management, and policy of information, communications and new media technologies, with a particular emphasis on cultural, social, cognitive, economic, ethical, and philosophical implications. AI & Society has a broad scope and is strongly interdisciplinary. We welcome contributions and participation from researchers and practitioners in a variety of fields including information technologies, humanities, social sciences, arts and sciences. This includes broader societal and cultural impacts, for example on governance, security, sustainability, identity, inclusion, working life, corporate and community welfare, and well-being of people. Co-authored articles from diverse disciplines are encouraged. AI & Society seeks to promote an understanding of the potential, transformative impacts and critical consequences of pervasive technology for societies. Technological innovations, including new sciences such as biotech, nanotech and neuroscience, offer a great potential for societies, but also pose existential risk. Rooted in the human-centred tradition of science and technology, the Journal acts as a catalyst, promoter and facilitator of engagement with diversity of voices and over-the-horizon issues of arts, science, technology and society. AI & Society expects that, in keeping with the ethos of the journal, submissions should provide a substantial and explicit argument on the societal dimension of research, particularly the benefits, impacts and implications for society. This may include factors such as trust, biases, privacy, reliability, responsibility, and competence of AI systems. Such arguments should be validated by critical comment on current research in this area. Curmudgeon Corner will retain its opinionated ethos. The journal is in three parts: a) full length scholarly articles; b) strategic ideas, critical reviews and reflections; c) Student Forum is for emerging researchers and new voices to communicate their ongoing research to the wider academic community, mentored by the Journal Advisory Board; Book Reviews and News; Curmudgeon Corner for the opinionated. Papers in the Original Section may include original papers, which are underpinned by theoretical, methodological, conceptual or philosophical foundations. The Open Forum Section may include strategic ideas, critical reviews and potential implications for society of current research. Network Research Section papers make substantial contributions to theoretical and methodological foundations within societal domains. These will be multi-authored papers that include a summary of the contribution of each author to the paper. Original, Open Forum and Network papers are peer reviewed. The Student Forum Section may include theoretical, methodological, and application orientations of ongoing research including case studies, as well as, contextual action research experiences. Papers in this section are normally single-authored and are also formally reviewed. Curmudgeon Corner is a short opinionated column on trends in technology, arts, science and society, commenting emphatically on issues of concern to the research community and wider society. Normal word length: Original and Network Articles 10k, Open Forum 8k, Student Forum 6k, Curmudgeon 1k. The exception to the co-author limit of Original and Open Forum (4), Network (10), Student (3) and Curmudgeon (2) articles will be considered for their special contributions. Please do not send your submissions by email but use the "Submit manuscript" button. NOTE TO AUTHORS: The Journal expects its authors to include, in their submissions: a) An acknowledgement of the pre-accept/pre-publication versions of their manuscripts on non-commercial and academic sites. b) Images: obtain permissions from the copyright holder/original sources. c) Formal permission from their ethics committees when conducting studies with people.
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信