Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Digital Humanities & Crowdsourcing:an Exploration
Laura CarlettiPortland, April 18th 2013
Presentation Overview
• Objective of the Study• Origins of the Study• Definition of Crowdsourcing• Criticisms• Public Contribution Models in DH• Methodology of the Study• Main Findings• Design Suggestions• Conclusions
Objective of the Study
• Framing crowdsourcing practices in Digital Humanities• Detecting emerging trends• Offering design suggestions
Origins of the Study• Ghostsigns Project: a collaborative effort to
photograph, research and archive the remaining examples of hand painted wall advertising in the UK and Ireland.
• Art Maps Project: a research initiative to explore the relation between artworks and the locations that they depict.
Definition of CrowdsourcingThe act of a company or institution taking a function once
performed by employees and outsourcing it to an undefined (and generally large) network of people in the form of an open call. This can take the form of peer-production (when the job is performed collaboratively), but is also often undertaken by sole individuals.[Howe, 2006]
Crowdsourcing is a type of participative online activity in which an individual, an institution, a non-profit organization, or company proposes to a group of individuals of varying knowledge, heterogeneity, and number, via a flexible open call, the voluntary undertaking of a task.[Estelles-Arolas & Gonzalez-Ladron-de-Guevara, 2012]
Criticisms
I don’t think Wikipedia can be described as ‘crowd sourcing’. The word comes from outsourcing – from cheap off-shore labour; even cheaper, get the public to do it for free – and it disrespects and misunderstands what people are doing.
[Jimmy Wales, Wikipedia’s co-founder]
For-profit VS Not-For-Profit Crowdsourcing
Public Contribution Models in DH
[Classification of Crowdsourcing Initiatives by Oomen & Aroyo, 2011]
Crowdsourcing Type Short Definition
Correction and Transcription
Inviting users to correct and/or transcribe outputs of digitisation processes
Contextualisation Adding contextual knowledge to objects, e.g. by telling stories or writing articles/wiki pages with contextual data
Complementing Collection Active pursuit of additional objects to be included in a (Web)exhibit or collection
Classification Gathering descriptive metadata related to object in a collection. Social tagging is a well-known example.
Co-curation Using inspiration/expertise of non-professional curators to create (Web)exhibits
Crowdfunding Collective cooperation of people who pool their money and other resources together to support efforts initiated by others.
[Public Participation Models based on Simon, 2010]
Public Participation Model Description
Contributory projects Visitors are solicited to provide limited and specified objects, actions, or ideas to an institutionally controlled process. Comment boards and story-sharing kiosks are both common platforms for contributory activities.
Collaborative projects Visitors are invited to serve as active partners in the creation of institutional projects that are originated and ultimately controlled by the institution.
Co-creative projects Community members work together with institutional staff members from the beginning to define the project’s goals and to generate the program or exhibit based on community interests.
Hosted projects The institution turns over a portion of its facilities and/or resources to present programs developed and implemented by public groups or casual visitors. This happens in both scientific and cultural institutions. Institutions share space and/or tools with community groups with a wide range of interests, from amateur astronomers to knitters.
Public Contribution Models in DH
Methodology of the Study• Literature Review;• Web search of crowdsourcing projects promoted by
Galleries, Libraries, Archives, Museum and Education Institutions;
• Selection criteria: public asked to perform a task and to actively contribute to the project;
• 36 projects selected and further analysed;• Website analysis in terms of: purpose, type of
contribution, number and interaction with the contributors, results displayed, and duration;
• Data collected between March and June 2012.
Main Findings
Practices• Integration and Reconfiguration of
Existing Assets• Creation of New Assets
Crowd• Size Variability• Online/Offline Engagement
Practices
Integration and Reconfiguration of Existing Assets: • Curating• Revising • Locating
Curating
Revising
Locating
Practices
Creation of New Assets: • Documenting Personal Life• Documenting History• Augmenting Locations
Documenting Personal Life
Documenting History
Augmenting Locations
Crowd
a group of individuals of varying knowledge, heterogeneity, and number
[Estelles-Arolas & Gonzalez-Ladron-de-Guevara, 2012]
Size Variability
Online/Offline Engagement
Design SuggestionsPurpose• Exploring new forms of public engagement• Enriching institutional resources• Developing new resources
Scale• Time (open/closed)• Number of contributors/resources needed
Audience• Intrinsic/Extrinsic motivation• Target
Conclusions
• Emergence of two trends• Taxonomy of crowdsourced tasks• Specificities of crowdsourcing in DH
Crowdsourcing VS Crowdcontribution
