No Cover Image

Book chapter 952 views 264 downloads

Crowdsourcing and Scholarly Culture: Understanding Expertise in an Age of Popularism

Alan Dix, Rachel Cowgill, Christina Bashford, Simon McVeigh, Rupert Ridgewell

Macrotask Crowdsourcing, Pages: 189 - 214

Swansea University Author: Alan Dix

Check full text

DOI (Published version): 10.1007/978-3-030-12334-5_7

Abstract

The increasing volume of digital material available to the humanities creates clear potential for crowdsourcing. However, tasks in the digital humanities typically do not satisfy the standard requirement for decomposition into microtasks each of which must require little expertise on behalf of the w...

Full description

Published in: Macrotask Crowdsourcing
ISBN: 978-3-030-12333-8 978-3-030-12334-5
ISSN: 1571-5035 2524-4477
Published: Springer 2019
Online Access: Check full text

URI: https://cronfa.swan.ac.uk/Record/cronfa51937
first_indexed 2019-09-18T14:19:04Z
last_indexed 2019-10-11T20:22:07Z
id cronfa51937
recordtype SURis
fullrecord <?xml version="1.0"?><rfc1807><datestamp>2019-10-11T15:49:24.3710495</datestamp><bib-version>v2</bib-version><id>51937</id><entry>2019-09-18</entry><title>Crowdsourcing and Scholarly Culture: Understanding Expertise in an Age of Popularism</title><swanseaauthors><author><sid>e31e47c578b2a6a39949aa7f149f4cf9</sid><firstname>Alan</firstname><surname>Dix</surname><name>Alan Dix</name><active>true</active><ethesisStudent>false</ethesisStudent></author></swanseaauthors><date>2019-09-18</date><abstract>The increasing volume of digital material available to the humanities creates clear potential for crowdsourcing. However, tasks in the digital humanities typically do not satisfy the standard requirement for decomposition into microtasks each of which must require little expertise on behalf of the worker and little context of the broader task. Instead, humanities tasks require scholarly knowledge to perform and even where sub-tasks can be extracted, these often involve broader context of the document or corpus from which they are extracted. That is the tasks are macrotasks, resisting simple decomposition. Building on a case study from musicology, the In Concert project, we will explore both the barriers to crowdsourcing in the creation of digital corpora and also examples where elements of automatic processing or less-expert work are possible in a broader matrix that also includes expert microtasks and macrotasks. Crucially we will see that the macrotask&#x2013;microtask distinction is nuanced: it is often possible to create a partial decomposition into less-expert microtasks with residual expert macrotasks, and crucially do this in ways that preserve scholarly values.</abstract><type>Book chapter</type><journal>Macrotask Crowdsourcing</journal><paginationStart>189</paginationStart><paginationEnd>214</paginationEnd><publisher>Springer</publisher><isbnPrint>978-3-030-12333-8</isbnPrint><isbnElectronic>978-3-030-12334-5</isbnElectronic><issnPrint>1571-5035</issnPrint><issnElectronic>2524-4477</issnElectronic><keywords>crowdsourcing, human-computer interaction, digital humanities, macro task, musicology, intelligent interfaces</keywords><publishedDay>7</publishedDay><publishedMonth>8</publishedMonth><publishedYear>2019</publishedYear><publishedDate>2019-08-07</publishedDate><doi>10.1007/978-3-030-12334-5_7</doi><url/><notes/><college>COLLEGE NANME</college><CollegeCode>COLLEGE CODE</CollegeCode><institution>Swansea University</institution><apcterm/><lastEdited>2019-10-11T15:49:24.3710495</lastEdited><Created>2019-09-18T10:47:22.3767296</Created><path><level id="1">Faculty of Science and Engineering</level><level id="2">School of Mathematics and Computer Science - Computer Science</level></path><authors><author><firstname>Alan</firstname><surname>Dix</surname><order>1</order></author><author><firstname>Rachel</firstname><surname>Cowgill</surname><order>2</order></author><author><firstname>Christina</firstname><surname>Bashford</surname><order>3</order></author><author><firstname>Simon</firstname><surname>McVeigh</surname><order>4</order></author><author><firstname>Rupert</firstname><surname>Ridgewell</surname><order>5</order></author></authors><documents><document><filename>0051937-18092019104823.pdf</filename><originalFilename>Crowdsourcing-and-Scholarly-Culture-authors-final-version.pdf</originalFilename><uploaded>2019-09-18T10:48:23.4100000</uploaded><type>Output</type><contentLength>4783964</contentLength><contentType>application/pdf</contentType><version>Accepted Manuscript</version><cronfaStatus>true</cronfaStatus><embargoDate>2021-08-07T00:00:00.0000000</embargoDate><copyrightCorrect>true</copyrightCorrect><language>eng</language></document></documents><OutputDurs/></rfc1807>
spelling 2019-10-11T15:49:24.3710495 v2 51937 2019-09-18 Crowdsourcing and Scholarly Culture: Understanding Expertise in an Age of Popularism e31e47c578b2a6a39949aa7f149f4cf9 Alan Dix Alan Dix true false 2019-09-18 The increasing volume of digital material available to the humanities creates clear potential for crowdsourcing. However, tasks in the digital humanities typically do not satisfy the standard requirement for decomposition into microtasks each of which must require little expertise on behalf of the worker and little context of the broader task. Instead, humanities tasks require scholarly knowledge to perform and even where sub-tasks can be extracted, these often involve broader context of the document or corpus from which they are extracted. That is the tasks are macrotasks, resisting simple decomposition. Building on a case study from musicology, the In Concert project, we will explore both the barriers to crowdsourcing in the creation of digital corpora and also examples where elements of automatic processing or less-expert work are possible in a broader matrix that also includes expert microtasks and macrotasks. Crucially we will see that the macrotask–microtask distinction is nuanced: it is often possible to create a partial decomposition into less-expert microtasks with residual expert macrotasks, and crucially do this in ways that preserve scholarly values. Book chapter Macrotask Crowdsourcing 189 214 Springer 978-3-030-12333-8 978-3-030-12334-5 1571-5035 2524-4477 crowdsourcing, human-computer interaction, digital humanities, macro task, musicology, intelligent interfaces 7 8 2019 2019-08-07 10.1007/978-3-030-12334-5_7 COLLEGE NANME COLLEGE CODE Swansea University 2019-10-11T15:49:24.3710495 2019-09-18T10:47:22.3767296 Faculty of Science and Engineering School of Mathematics and Computer Science - Computer Science Alan Dix 1 Rachel Cowgill 2 Christina Bashford 3 Simon McVeigh 4 Rupert Ridgewell 5 0051937-18092019104823.pdf Crowdsourcing-and-Scholarly-Culture-authors-final-version.pdf 2019-09-18T10:48:23.4100000 Output 4783964 application/pdf Accepted Manuscript true 2021-08-07T00:00:00.0000000 true eng
title Crowdsourcing and Scholarly Culture: Understanding Expertise in an Age of Popularism
spellingShingle Crowdsourcing and Scholarly Culture: Understanding Expertise in an Age of Popularism
Alan Dix
title_short Crowdsourcing and Scholarly Culture: Understanding Expertise in an Age of Popularism
title_full Crowdsourcing and Scholarly Culture: Understanding Expertise in an Age of Popularism
title_fullStr Crowdsourcing and Scholarly Culture: Understanding Expertise in an Age of Popularism
title_full_unstemmed Crowdsourcing and Scholarly Culture: Understanding Expertise in an Age of Popularism
title_sort Crowdsourcing and Scholarly Culture: Understanding Expertise in an Age of Popularism
author_id_str_mv e31e47c578b2a6a39949aa7f149f4cf9
author_id_fullname_str_mv e31e47c578b2a6a39949aa7f149f4cf9_***_Alan Dix
author Alan Dix
author2 Alan Dix
Rachel Cowgill
Christina Bashford
Simon McVeigh
Rupert Ridgewell
format Book chapter
container_title Macrotask Crowdsourcing
container_start_page 189
publishDate 2019
institution Swansea University
isbn 978-3-030-12333-8
978-3-030-12334-5
issn 1571-5035
2524-4477
doi_str_mv 10.1007/978-3-030-12334-5_7
publisher Springer
college_str Faculty of Science and Engineering
hierarchytype
hierarchy_top_id facultyofscienceandengineering
hierarchy_top_title Faculty of Science and Engineering
hierarchy_parent_id facultyofscienceandengineering
hierarchy_parent_title Faculty of Science and Engineering
department_str School of Mathematics and Computer Science - Computer Science{{{_:::_}}}Faculty of Science and Engineering{{{_:::_}}}School of Mathematics and Computer Science - Computer Science
document_store_str 1
active_str 0
description The increasing volume of digital material available to the humanities creates clear potential for crowdsourcing. However, tasks in the digital humanities typically do not satisfy the standard requirement for decomposition into microtasks each of which must require little expertise on behalf of the worker and little context of the broader task. Instead, humanities tasks require scholarly knowledge to perform and even where sub-tasks can be extracted, these often involve broader context of the document or corpus from which they are extracted. That is the tasks are macrotasks, resisting simple decomposition. Building on a case study from musicology, the In Concert project, we will explore both the barriers to crowdsourcing in the creation of digital corpora and also examples where elements of automatic processing or less-expert work are possible in a broader matrix that also includes expert microtasks and macrotasks. Crucially we will see that the macrotask–microtask distinction is nuanced: it is often possible to create a partial decomposition into less-expert microtasks with residual expert macrotasks, and crucially do this in ways that preserve scholarly values.
published_date 2019-08-07T02:02:39Z
_version_ 1821369129560440832
score 11.04748

Similar Items