cni spring task force meeting | april 7, 2009 ethicshare: a model for virtual research communities...
TRANSCRIPT
CNI Spring Task Force Meeting | April 7, 2009
EthicShare: A Model for Virtual Research
Communities
Frazier Benya, Center for Bioethics, U of MN
John Riedl, Computer Science, U of MN
John T. Butler, University of Minnesota Libraries
Kate McCready, University of Minnesota Libraries
EthicShare Project Staff:• Principal Investigators: Wendy Pradt Lougee (Uof
MN Libraries) Jeffrey Kahn (U of MN Center for Bioethics) & John Riedl (U of MN Computer Science)
• Project Director : Kate McCready (U of MN Libraries)
• Technology Lead: John Butler (U of MN Libraries)
• Collections : Cecily Marcus (U of MN Libraries) & Frazier Benya (U of MN Center for Bioethics, grad student); Stephen Hearn
• Developers: Chad Fennell (U of MN Libraries), David Naughton (U of MN Libraries), Bill Tantzen ( U of MN Libraries) & Tony Lam (U of MN Computer Science grad student)
EthicShare in a Nutshell• Online research environment for information
discovery and collaboration for practical ethics scholars and students
• Based at: the University of Minnesota's Center for Bioethics, Libraries, and Department of Computer Science & Engineering
• Funded by the Andrew W. Mellon Foundation and the National Science Foundation, Council on Library and Information Resources
EthicShare Framework
EthicShare Partnerships• Data:
• National Library of Medicine - PubMed & Catalog data
• OCLC – WorldCat data
• Network Services: • OCLC – Registry Services
• University Centers: • Georgetown University – Bioethics Thesaurus• Governance and Presentations at Societies by
Partners from: University of Virginia, Indiana University-Bloomington, Indiana University-Purdue University, Indianapolis and Stanford University
EthicShare Development History• 2004 Scholarly Communications Institute: Held
at the Council on Library and Information Resources for Bioethicists. (Background – Bioethics Scholars are primarily humanities faculty (philosophy, theology) but the field also pulls from law, policy, medicine and public health.)
• 2005-2006 U of M Libraries Research: Studied the research behaviors and methodologies of scholars in the humanities and social sciences
• Identified “gaps” in the research process• What solutions would support the advancement of a
field?• Would collaborative tools serve the needs of serious
scholars?
• “Helping Hands” project: NSF funded U of MN - Computer Science and Bioethics exploring how to encourage participation in collaborative tools.
EthicShare Development History• 2006-2007 EthicShare Planning Project:
• Assessment of a field• Site visits and surveys• Prototype of site
• 2008-2009 EthicShare Pilot Project: • Build a “collection” of high quality, focused
materials aggregated from a variety of source material providers
• Development of a community-supported environment
• Engage the community in the development process
• Developing process and technology models for the development of virtual research community environments.
Initial Tool and Feature Selection• Planning Grant:
• Identifying and tuning collaborative technologies for a specific community of researchers
• How do you know what you don’t know? Bioethics Scholars didn’t use collective work sites or technologies.
• Held 5 site visits – • U of Minnesota• University of Indiana• University of Indiana – Purdue University – Indianapolis• University of Virginia• Georgetown University
Site Visits – Early 2007• Presentation of Social Features
‐ EthicShare team created a presentation of successful web-based tools and features from various sites for bioethics faculty and graduate students to see.
• Discussion of Features‐ During and after the presentations we discussed
the reaction of these features and the idea of implementing them within the bioethics community
• Survey of Interest/Knowledge‐ Asked the participants to complete a 10 minute
survey at the end of this presentation to formalize their opinions.
EthicShare Survey Summary Report
• “Social” features weren’t “very important” but rated well when “somewhat important”, “important” and “very important” were totaled:
‐ Get Updates via Email/RSS about New Content (77%)
‐ Get Recommendations of Resources (68%)
‐ Ability to Share Your Work With your Colleagues (76%)
‐ Ability to Review a Resources (79%)
‐ Community Discussion Space (79%)
‐ Add Resources to the Site (71%)
Engage and Evaluate - Iterative DesignBeta Testing - Feedback Loops
Engage and Evaluate - Iterative Design
EthicShare Site Demo
UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA
Altruism, Selfishness, and Contribution
on the Social Web
GroupLens ResearchUniversity of Minnesota
John Riedl
UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA
Bowling Alone (Amazon reviews)
Adaptive Hypermedia 200834
Messages
Community-maintained Artifacts of Lasting ValueKey Research ChallengesoAttract contributionsoMaintain qualityoAchieve agreement
Adaptive Hypermedia 200835
Tags scale:•Library of Congress: 20M books in 200 years.•www.librarything.com: 22M books in 3 years.
Tag draw relevance from “the wisdom of crowds”
Adaptive Hypermedia 200836
Tag Selection Algorithms
“The Quest for Quality Tags”S. Sen, F. Harper, A. LaPitz, J. RiedlGROUP 2007
Adaptive Hypermedia 200837
RQ: How can a tagging system show users tags
they want to see?
Adaptive Hypermedia 200838
Tag PredictionRandom baseline: 21%
Implicit features:number of applications (39%)number of users (51%)number of searches for a tag (44%)number of users who searched for a tag (48%)length of tag (42%)
Moderation-based features:global average rating for a tag (59%)user-normalized global average rating for a tag (62%)tag reputation (57%)
Hybrid combinations: logistic regression, decision trees (67%)
Adaptive Hypermedia 200839
Research Questions
Can folksonomy be encouraged? o Showing users more tags leads to more
vocabulary reuse oHow much convergence is valuable?
UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA
Motivating Participation by Displaying the Value of Contribution
Rashid, Ling, Tassone, Resnick, Kraut, Riedl
CHI 2006, Montréal
UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA
Adaptive Hypermedia 200842
What Theory Tells Us…Collective Effort Modelo People will contribute more if:
They believe their effort is important to the group
They like the groupSmaller is Bettero Slovic, Fischhoff, & Lichtenstein, 1980o People feel greater concern when the reference
group they’re part of grows smaller.Specificity Matterso Small & Loewenstein, 2003o Specific identity of those helped is important in
drawing people’s support.
Adaptive Hypermedia 200843
VOICE 2 Screen shotNumerical values are represented
by smilies
Who the contribution helps
Value of each contribution
Adaptive Hypermedia 200844
Results
Want Smilies on the regular interface?
Self-report
1: Strongly Disagree2: Disagree3: Neutral4: Agree5: Strongly Agree
1 2 3 4 5
Self 3.87
All MovieLens 3.13
Similar Group 2.97
Dissimilar Group
2.94
Control 2.68
0% 5% 10% 15% 20%
Probability of rating a movie
Behavioral data
Self 7.2%
All MovieLens 10.2%
Similar Group 15.8%
Dissimilar
Group 5.9%
Control 7.4%
Adaptive Hypermedia 200845
Altruism, Selfishness, and Contribution
on the Social Web
GroupLens ResearchUniversity of Minnesota
John Riedl
Adaptive Hypermedia 200846
Adoption & Sustainability
Adaptive Hypermedia 200847
• Community/User Engagement
• Economic structure and strategies
• Technology framework
Sustainable: valued, reliable, and persistent
Adoption & Sustainability
Adaptive Hypermedia 200848
Rogers, then Moore
Adaptive Hypermedia 200849
Adaptive Hypermedia 200850
Sustainability – Economic Structure
Economically sustainable academic resources require:
‐ Recognition of benefits‐ Incentives for decision-makers to act‐ Selection‐ Efficiency‐ Appropriate organization and governance
-- Brian Lavoie (Blue Ribbon Task Force on Sustainable Digital Preservation and Access)
Adaptive Hypermedia 200851
Sustainability – Economic Framework
Recognition of benefits: Articulate benefits cultivate sense of value
willingness to pay
Incentives for decision-makers to act: Appropriate incentives ongoing willingness to
provide
Selection: Effective/reliable delivery predictability
Efficiency: Efficient use of resources productive use of
resources
Appropriate organization and governance:Organization/governance trusted resource
Adaptive Hypermedia 200852
Sustainability – Possible Economic Strategies
A. University of Minnesota Hosting & Supporting• Focus area for libraries – foster virtual research
communities (AgEcon, HarvestChoice, EthicShare)
B. Professional Societies • Partner with the professional societies to get
support. Hosting and operational support would remain at the University (distributed editorial model)
C. Institutional Memberships – Centers• 75 Center for Bioethics – provide support
D. Institutional Memberships – Libraries• Libraries purchase subscriptions similarly to other
indexes.
E. Advertisements• Can “scholarly” coexist with advertisements?
Adaptive Hypermedia 200853
Sustainability – Technology Framework
Adaptive Hypermedia 200854
• Collections:• Expand the Index (info, people, tools)• Capture of Community’s Fugitive Content• Gray Literature Contributions• Digital Collections (OAI-harvests), media• Curricular Materials/ Learning Objects
• Site Features:• Recommenders • “Classics” Lists• Bioethics Policy Development Support
• Release the VRC Technology Stack and Development Model
EthicShare … the future
Coalition for Networked Information | April 7 2009
Thank You!
Coalition for Networked Information | April 7 2009
John Riedl - [email protected]
Frazier Benya - [email protected]
John Butler - [email protected]
Kate McCready - [email protected]
EthicShare Site: http://www.ethicshare.org
Background: http://www.lib.umn.edu/about/ethicshare