• Save

Loading…

Flash Player 9 (or above) is needed to view presentations.
We have detected that you do not have it on your computer. To install it, go here.

Like this presentation? Why not share!

An Exploration of VGI In Use

on

  • 473 views

Presentation given at the 3rd Data Usability Workshop - Southampton

Presentation given at the 3rd Data Usability Workshop - Southampton

Statistics

Views

Total Views
473
Views on SlideShare
473
Embed Views
0

Actions

Likes
0
Downloads
0
Comments
0

0 Embeds 0

No embeds

Accessibility

Upload Details

Uploaded via as Microsoft PowerPoint

Usage Rights

CC Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs LicenseCC Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs LicenseCC Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs License

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
    Processing…
Post Comment
Edit your comment
  • VGI - the creation of geographic information by largely untrained volunteersPast Research into VGI UsabilityAims and objectives of studying VGI & PGIMethodologyResults
  • “How volunteered geographic information may be combined with professional geographic information to make applications of higher consumer usability”According to Wordle, these are the key words of my thesis so far
  • Previous work had looked into the relationship between the stakeholders in VGI
  • Wanted to move on from understanding stakeholders and start to understand information in use. Particularly what volunteered information users over and above professional information
  • Criteria createdApplications from OS’s GeoVation scanned for potential communities
  • Kayakers were selected as a group which embodied the best of these properties
  • RESEARCH APPROACHQualitative analysis– Focus GroupEfficient techniqueNatural responsesFocused on important topicsEnjoyableCost effectiveWide range of views
  • 32 participants Over 4 Clubs9 Intermediate (1-4 years experience)23 expert (5 years + experience)So the study had two parts
  • degree of ethnographic research was undertaken, kayaking with the groups at least once before the focus groups.To fully understand and relate to the findings from the study
  • 2) Ran focus groups in order to acquire a wide range of view pointsMain body of research for this study
  • Open Coding – What is coming out of the dataGrouping into Concepts – Asking questions of data as previous slideApplying sub-categorisation of Relevance (Barry & Schamber 1998), not shaping open codes, seeing how they relate to Relevance theory
  • Provides a ‘coding tree’ looking roughly like this
  • Now to run over some of the key findings from this study – Focusing on Data UsabilityPaper in progress for GISRUK 2011 which will include a broader overviewOutcomesInformation in UseInformation SourcesRelation to planning processRelation to static and dynamic information
  • WHAT IS THIS GRAPH ABOUT!Focusing today on the Results forData Usability and touch on the Planning Processthe following slides show some basic outcomes from workThis graph shall be used to highlight phenomenonYou may notice TANGABILITY (definite, proven information is provided; hard data or actual numbers are provided) is missing from the responses of participants
  • Talking about information to participants, not exclusively geographic informationYet information wasn’t about A weir, it was about THIS weir (VGLI – Volunteered Geo-Located Information)Shown in the data
  • Experience is the filter for all information taken in by this study]We see this in our data, how trust of personal experience, and the experience of other trusted kayakers is prevalent over authoritative information
  • This is mirrored by the Hierarchical Task Analysis (HTA) developed from the study to highlight the Planning ProcessThese are the processes requiring volunteered or professional information for decisions to be madeLeaving
  • As focusing on usability, only a snap shot of the overall pictureConsidering highly negative ‘Out of Date’ with highly positive ‘Up to Date’Easy to see how amateur volunteered and professional information comparesOne participant commented.....
  • Chart shows the number of responses made by participants when asked to comment on professional and volunteered informationThe major columns are as expectedThe minor columns are ‘incorrect’ perceptions (thinking something professional is actually volunteered, e.g. Forums)Where people say ‘volunteered’ when asked about ‘professional’ – sources are ‘unauthoritive’E.g. – Online kayaking forums/ InternetWhere people say ‘professional’ when asked about volunteered – sources are ‘authoritative’E.g. – BCU Local Access Officer (LAO)
  • Discussion points- What do you think of VGLI

An Exploration of VGI In Use An Exploration of VGI In Use Presentation Transcript

  • An Exploration of VGI in Use
    Christopher J. Parker
    3rd Workshop on Data Usability
    10th November 2010
  • 2
  • 3
  • Aims of Study
    4
    Highlight the different stages in the process life cycle of the users’ activities where information is utilised with benefit to the user.
    Understand what makes volunteered information different from professional information when used in a real world situation.
    Determine how using volunteered or professional information affects on the outcomes of activities it when it is used.
    Explore under what conditions volunteered information may provide unique opportunities to the user over and above that of professional information.
  • Selecting Group
    5
  • 6
  • 7
  • 8
    Loughborough
  • 9
  • 10
  • 11
    Relevance:
    • Depth
    • Accuracy
    • Clarity
    • Currency
    • Tangibility
    • Quality of source
    • Accessibility
    • Availability
    • Verification
    • Affectiveness
    (Barry, Schamber 1998)
    • Source
    • Planning process
    • Types of information
    • Data usability
    • Role in activities
    • Role in outcome
    • Dynamic/ static information
    http://www.waier.org.au/forums/2001/mccarthy.html
  • 12
  • How To Not Get Distracted By ‘Interface’
    13
    Asked about what sources and how they are used
    Mainly focused on how information makes a difference
    Delivery method of interest
    How are Volunteered delivery methods different to professional
    Trust is a relationship between provider and consumer
    Did not focus Axial coding on interface
  • 14
  • 15
  • Currency, Depth & Scope and Quality of the information are the three most relevant factors when searching for information.
    16
  • Data usability has a clear geographical element (i.e. both time and place are important).
    17
  • The data needs, and the usefulness of data to individuals is dependent on the level of experience that the end users had with the kayaking application domain.
    18
  • 19
    (Preece et al., 2002)
  • Usable data often has a temporal aspect, such that the usefulness of data often ‘decayed’ within a time window of opportunity. A good example of this is water levels affecting the ‘paddleability’ of the river.
    20
    What maps and guidebooks don’t give you is up to date information. Just because it was a good guide to the river five years ago doesn’t mean it’s a good guide to the river now.
  • When questioned about professional and volunteered sources, participants tended to refer to sources they perceive as reliable and respectable as professional, despite their volunteer contribution base.
    21
  • Future Research
    22
    Study 3
    Ethnographic Research
    Exploratory to support discussion of Study 2 findings
    Discussion & Theory Generation
    Study 4
    Testing Theory
    Disabled Travellers (?)
  • www.UserGeneratedDesign.co.uk
    23
  • References
    24
    Barry, C.L. & Schamber, L. 1998, "Users' criteria for relevance evaluation: a cross-situational comparison", Information processing & management, vol. 34, no. 2-3, pp. 219-236.
    Goodchild, M. F. (2007). Citizens as sensors: The world of volunteered geography. GeoJournal, 69(4), 211-221.
    Preece, J., Rogers, Y., & Sharpe, H. (2002). Interaction design: Beyond human-computer interaction. United States of America: John Wiley & Sons.