Humanities Crowdsourcing

• Authors: Favier Laurence

Title variants

PL

Crowdsourcing w humanistyce

• Languages of publication: EN PL

Abstracts

EN

PURPOSE/THESIS: The management literature provides a generic model of crowdsourcing for all applications. This paper is a discussion of selected features of crowdsourcing applied in science and humanities in comparison to citizen sciences. It emphasizes the relationship between the model of crowdsourcing used in humanities research and the debate on the research infrastructure. APPROACH/METHODS: The comparative analysis of humanities crowdsourcing models based on the review of academic literature and current crowdsourcing projects. RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS: Crowdsourcing modeling attempts do not result in a unified approach to e-collaboration and single model of e-science. The humanities have their own issues and resources, deal with cultural diversity and are supported by appropriate methodologies. Moreover, the standardization of the description of issues studied by the humanities and modeling of humanities research practices cannot really reduce their own diversity. Further research must be conducted on the evolution of learning practices and methods of collaboration. ORIGINALITY/VALUE: The comparison of approaches to the phenomenon of crowdsourcing used in academic literature on management, the analysis of crowdsourcing practices in citizen sciences and crowdsourcing patterns in humanities literature.

PL

CEL/TEZA: W literaturze z zakresu nauk o zarządzaniu wprowadzony został ogólny model crowdsourcingu dla wszelkich zastosowań. Niniejszy artykuł dotyczy specyficznych cech crowdsourcingu wykorzystywanego w nauce i humanistyce w porównaniu z nauką obywatelską. Podkreślony został w nim związek między modelowaniem crowdsourcingu wykorzystywanego w badaniach w humanistyce a debatą nad infrastrukturą badawczą. KONCEPCJA/METODY BADAŃ: Analiza porównawcza modeli crowdsourcingu wykorzystywanych w humanistyce na podstawie analizy literatury akademickiej i istniejących projektów crowdsourcingowych. WYNIKI I WNIOSKI: Próby modelowania crowdsourcingu nie prowadzą do wyodrębnienia jednego podejścia do e-współpracy i jednego modelu e-nauki. Nauki humanistyczne, które cechują specyficzne problemy i zasoby, mają do czynienia z różnorodnością kulturową i są wspierane przez właściwe im metody badawcze. Co więcej, standaryzacja opisu przedmiotów badań nauk humanistycznych oraz modelowanie ich praktyk badawczych nie zredukują ich różnorodności. potrzebne są dalsze badania w zakresie: praktyk uczenia się i sposobów współpracy. ORYGINALNOŚĆ/WARTOŚĆ POZNAWCZA: Porównanie podejść do zjawiska crowdsourcingu stosowanych w literaturze nauk o zarządzaniu, analiza praktyk crowdsourcingu w naukach obywatelskich i wzorów crowdsourcingu w literaturze humanistycznej.

Keywords

EN

Humanities crowdsourcing; Citizen sciences; Research infrastructures

PL

Crowdsourcing w humanistyce; Nauki obywatelskie; Infrastruktura badawcza

• Publisher: Stowarzyszenie Bibliotekarzy Polskich i Wydział Dziennikarstwa, Informacji i Bibliologii. Uniwersytet Warszawski
• Journal: Zagadnienia Informacji Naukowej - Studia Informacyjne
• Year: 2016
• Volume: 54
• Issue: 2(108)
• Pages: 7-21

Dates

received

2016-07-18

revised

2016-10-17

accepted

2016-10-20

Contributors

author

Favier Laurence

• Laboratoire GERiiCO, Universite de Lille, Villeneuve d'Ascq, France

References

• Borgman C. (2009). A Digital Future is Now: A Call to Action for the Humanities. Digital Humanities Qu-aterly [online] 3(4) [17.10.2016], http://www.digitalhumanities.org/dhq/vol/3/4/000077/000077.html
• Bowker, G. C.; Baker, K. S.; Millerand, F.; Ribes, D. (2010). Toward Information Infrastructure Studies: Ways of Knowing in a Networked Environment. In: J. Hunsinger, L. Klastrup, J. M. Allen (eds.), International Handbook of Internet Research, Londres, Springer, 97–118.
• Burger-Helmchen, T.; Pénin, J. (2011). Crowdsourcing: définition, enjeux, typologie. Management & Avenir (41), 254–269.
• Carletti, L.; McAuley, D.; Price, D.; Giannachi, G.; Benford, S. (2013). Digital Humanities and Crowd-sourcing: an exploration. MW 2013: Museums and the Web. The Annual Conference of Museums and the Web[online], April 17–20 2013, Portland, USA [17.10.2016], http://mw2013.museumsand-theweb.com/proposals/digital-humanities-and-crowdsourcing-an-exploration/
• Dunn, S.; Hedges, M. (2012). Crowd-Sourcing Scoping Study. Engaging the Crowd with Huma-nities Research [online]. Arts & Humanities Research Council, A project of AHRC Connected Communities Theme [17.10.2016], http://crowds.cerch.kcl.ac.uk/wp-content/uploads/2012/12/Crowdsourcing-connected-communities.pdf
• Dunn, S.; Hedges, M. (2013). Crowdsourcing as a Component of Humanities Research Infrastructures. International Journal of Humanities and Arts Computing 7(1–2), 147–169.
• Edwards, P. N.; Mayernik, M. S.; Batcheller, A. L.; Bowker G. C.; Borgman, Ch. L. (2011). Science Friction: Data, Metadata, and Collaboration. Social Studies of Science 41(5), 667–690.
• Estellés-Arolas, E.; Gonzáles-Ladrón-de-Guevara, F. (2012). Towards an Integrated Crowdsourcing Definition. Journal of Information Science 38(2), 1–14
• Favier, L. (2015). Les Humanités numériques et l’évolution des infrastructures de recherche: quels enjeux pour l’organisation des connaissances? [online]. 1 Les Humanités numériques et l’évolution des infrastructures de recherche: quels enjeux pour l’organisation des connaissances [online]. The 10th ISKO-France conference, 5–6 novembre 2015, Systèmes d’organisation des connaissances et humanités numériques [17.10.2016], http://www.isko-france.asso.fr/isko2015/
• Fraisse, A.; Paroubek, P. (2015). Vers des pratiques collaboratives pour les systèmes d’organisation de connaissances [online]. The10th ISKO-France Conference, 5–6 novembre 2015, Systèmes d’organisation des connaissances et humanités numériques [17.10.2016], http://www.isko-france.asso.fr/isko2015/
• Fraisse, A.; Paroubek, P. (2014). Toward a Unifying Model for Opinion, Sentiment and Emotion Annotation and Information Extraction. In: Proceedings of (LREC 2014) the 9th International Conference on Language Resources and Evaluation, May 26–31, 2014. Reykjavik, Iceland, 3881–3886.
• Goody, J. (1977). The Domestication of the Savage Mind . Cambridge : Cambridge University Press. La raison graphique. La domestication de la pensée sauvage. French translation: Minuit, coll. “Le sens commun”, 1979
• Goody, J. (2000). The Power of the Written Tradition. London: Smithsonian Institution Press. French translation: Pouvoirs et savoirs de l’écrit. Paris: la Dispute, 2007.
• Grams, Ch. (2010). Why the Open Source Way Trumps the Crowdsourcing Way [online]. Opensource.com Blog [17.10.2016], http://opensource.com/business/10/4/why-open-source-way-trumps--crowdsourcing-way
• Hennicke, S.; Gradmann, S.; Dill, K.; Tschumpel, G.; Thoden, K.; Morbindoni, Ch.; Pichler, A. (2015). Research Report on DH Scholarly Primitives. Digitised Manuscripts to Europeana. Project cofunded by the European Commission within the ICT Policy Support Programme, http://dm2e.eu/files/D3.4_1.0_Research_Report_on_DH_Scholarly_Primitives_150210.pdf
• Howe, J. (2006). The Rise of Crowsourcing [online]. Wired Magazine [6.03.2015], http://archive.wired.com/wired/archive/14.06/crowds_pr.html
• Jacob, C. (ed.) (2007). Lieux de savoir. Espaces et communautés. Paris: Albin Michel.
• Nakatsu, R.T.; Grossmann, E.B.; Iacovou, Ch.L. (2014). A Taxonomy of Crowdsourcing Based on Task Complexity. Journal of Information Science, 40(6), 823–834.
• Oomen, J.; Aroyo, L. (2011). Crowdsourcing in the Cultural Heritage Domain: Opportunities and Challenges. In: 5th International Conference on Communities & Technologies – C&T 29 June – 2 July 2011, The Edge, State Library of Queensland, Brisbane, Australia. ACM 978-1-4503-0824-3
• Rouse, C. A. (2010). A Preliminary Taxonomy of Crowdsourcing. In: ACIS 2010 Proceedings[online], Paper 76, http://aisel.aisnet.org/acis2010/76
• Sabou, M.; Bontcheva, K.; Scharl, A.; Föls, M. (2013). Games with a Purpose or Mechanised Labour? A Comparative Study. In: I-Know’13. Proceedings of the 13th International Conference on Knowledge Management and Knowledge Technologies, Graz, Austria, Paper 19.
• Schreibman, S., Siemens, R., and Unsworth, J. (eds) (2016). Crowdsourcing in the Digital Humanities. In: A New Companion to Digital Humanities. Wiley-Blackwel, 420–439.
• Schreibman, S.; Gradmann, S.; Hennicke, S.; Blanke, T.; Chambers, S.; Dunning, A.; Gray, J.; Lau-er, G.; Pichler, A.; Renn, J. et al. (2013). Beyond Infrastructure Modelling Scholarly Research and Collaboration. Digital Humanities, Jul 2013, Lincoln, United States. , https://hal.inria.fr/hal-00801439/document
• Unsworth, J. (2000). Scholarly Primitives: What Methods Do Humanities Researchers Have in Com-mon, and How Might Our Tools Reflect This? [online]. Symposium on “Humanities Computing: formal methods, experimental practice” sponsored by King’s College, London, May 13, 2000 [17.10.2016], http://people.brandeis.edu/~unsworth/Kings.5–00/primitives.html
• Van Peursen, W. Th., Thoutenhoofd, E.; van der Weel, A. (2010). Text Comparison and Digital Creativity: The Production of Presence and Meaning in Digital Text Scholarship . Leiden BRILL.

Identifiers

ISSN

0324-8194

EISSN

2392-2648

DOI

https://doi.org/10.36702/zin.300