Pathfinder: An Online Collaboration Environment for Citizen Scientists

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.

0 comments

Post a comment

    Post a comment
    Embed Video
    Edit your comment Cancel

    Favorites, Groups & Events

    Pathfinder: An Online Collaboration Environment for Citizen Scientists - Presentation Transcript

    1. Kurt Luther, Georgia Institute of Technology Scott Counts, Microsoft Research Kristin B. Stecher, Microsoft Research Aaron Hoff, Microsoft Research Paul Johns, Microsoft Research 1
    2. 2
    3. 3
    4. Comprehension  ◦ Preferred reading with Pathfinder ◦ Felt more confident in their answers  But weren‟t faster or more accurate * is significant (4 here) 4
    5. Frank M. Chapman (1864 - 1945) 5
    6. 27 participants  90 species  18,500 birds  1900 6
    7. 27 participants 59,918 participants   2,267 species 90 species   57,704,250 birds 18,500 birds   1900 2007 7
    8. Definition  ◦ Non-scientist volunteers participating as field assistants in scientific studies [Cohn 2008] Many fields  ◦ Ornithology, astronomy, oncology, entomology, etc. Two main goals  ◦ Data collection ◦ Engage public in scientific process 8
    9. Christmas Bird Count 9
    10. 300+ scientific publications 10
    11. Definition  ◦ Non-scientist volunteers participating as field assistants in scientific studies [Cohn 2008] Many fields  ◦ Ornithology, astronomy, oncology, entomology, etc. Two main goals   ◦ Data collection ? ◦ Engage public in scientific process 11
    12. Scientific Process Observations Observations  Data collection Data collection  Questions Questions ? Hypotheses Hypotheses ? Analyses Analyses ? Discussions Discussions ? Conclusions Conclusions ? 12
    13. Pathfinder – home page 13
    14. Pathfinder – home page 14
    15. Track (user-generated) 15
    16. Track (scraper-generated) 16
    17. Pathfinder – home page 17
    18. Pathfinder – home page 18
    19. Discussion page – summary section 19
    20. Discussion page – summary section 20
    21. Discussion page – “con” evidence highlighted 21
    22. Discussion page – responses section 22
    23. Discussion page – embedded track expanded 23
    24. Discussion page – editing responses 24
    25. Discussion page – editing responses 25
    26. Can Pathfinder help citizen scientists engage  more deeply with their data? What would citizen scientists do with  Pathfinder? ◦ Would they be able to use it? ◦ Would they enjoy using it? How does Pathfinder compare with existing  online collaboration tools? 26
    27. 15 participants  ◦ Used their own office and computer 2 conditions (within-subjects)  ◦ Pathfinder and standard wiki 4 tasks  ◦ 2 editing, 2 comprehension 4 topics  Global – Kyoto protocol ◦ Global – Climate change ◦ Local – Seattle traffic and temperature ◦ Local – Seattle traffic and pollution ◦ 27
    28. Pathfinder condition Standard wiki condition 28
    29. During each task  ◦ Observational notes ◦ Log files ◦ Written responses After each task  ◦ Survey End of each experiment  ◦ General questionnaire ◦ Structured interview 29
    30. Editing  ◦ No significant differences between systems * is significant (none here) 30
    31. Comprehension  ◦ Preferred reading with Pathfinder ◦ Felt more confident in their answers  But weren‟t faster or more accurate * is significant (4 here) 31
    32. Overall  ◦ 14 of 15 preferred Pathfinder to standard wiki  1 tie 32
    33. Milestones and data sets  ◦ Added all milestone types  Placeholders/outlining tools ◦ Embedding and exporting data  Embedding vs. tabbed browsing ◦ Used overview to read the document “Without the overview it‟s hard to read at all.” –P7 “I like the inclusion of predictions… Having them in the template almost makes you feel free to blue sky. Just having that little label there.” –P5 33
    34. Accuracy  ◦ Argumentation while editing, not writing Attribution  ◦ Wanting to “call out” others but being unable “If I‟m trying to respond to something, to address that person, you can‟t really do that without saying, „In the previous entry…‟” –P8 34
    35. Design considerations for fostering original  research ◦ Attribution  Scientific community vs. Wikipedia [Forte & Bruckman 2005] 35
    36. Article (wiki-style) Discussion (forum-style) [Forte & Bruckman 2005] 36
    37. Design considerations for fostering original  research ◦ Meta-discussions  Commenting ◦ Social translucence [Erickson & Kellogg 2000]  Awareness, visibility, accountability  High level summary  detailed histories 37
    38. Engaging novice and expert citizen scientists  ◦ Milestones: the tradeoff for improved comprehension  More work to edit, easier to read ◦ Drawing in novices  Prediction and To-do milestones  Heterogeneous granularity [Benkler 2002]  Legitimate peripheral participation [Lave & Wenger 1991] ◦ Supporting expert citizens and professional scientists  Rewards and reuse 38
    39. Traditional citizen science rarely goes beyond  data collection. Pathfinder helps citizen scientists  collaboratively discuss and analyze their data. Pathfinder users were able to, and enjoyed,  deeper engagement in the scientific process. Citizen scientists need special tools because  they generate original research. 39
    40. Thank you  ◦ Microsoft Research  Scott Counts, Kristin Stecher, Aaron Hoff, Paul Johns ◦ Georgia Tech  Craig Tashman, Eugene Medynskiy, Lana Yarosh, Sarita Yardi, Kelly Caine ◦ Photo credits  evelynishere on Flickr Contact me  ◦ Kurt Luther: luther@cc.gatech.edu 40

    + resurgensresurgens, 7 months ago

    custom

    422 views, 0 favs, 0 embeds more stats

    Presented by Kurt Luther (GVU Center, Georgia Tech) more

    More info about this document

    © All Rights Reserved

    Go to text version

    • Total Views 422
      • 422 on SlideShare
      • 0 from embeds
    • Comments 0
    • Favorites 0
    • Downloads 0
    Most viewed embeds

    more

    All embeds

    less

    Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
    Flag as inappropriate

    Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate. If needed, use the feedback form to let us know more details.

    Cancel
    File a copyright complaint
    Having problems? Go to our helpdesk?

    Categories