Nichesourcing: Harnessing the Power of Crowds of Experts

Boer, Victor de; Hildebrand, Michiel; Aroyo, Lora; Leenheer, Pieter De; Dijkshoorn, Chris; Tesfa, Binyam; Schreiber, Guus

doi:10.1007/978-3-642-33876-2_3

Cited by 34 publications

(21 citation statements)

References 11 publications

(11 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Nevertheless, it may be worthwhile to look for ways to surpass these disadvantages, because the application of social tagging may engage audiences and augment awareness of heritage collections (Springer et al, ), create different access points (Lu et al, , p. 764; Thøgersen, ) that help increasing indexer‐searcher consistency, and may complement automatic annotations (Freiburg et al, ). One initiative to improve tag quality is nichesourcing , a form of human computation that takes advantage of social tagging but involves experts, as opposed to crowdsourcing , in which taggers are the general public with no specific knowledge of a given domain (De Boer et al, ).…”

Section: Related Workmentioning

confidence: 99%

Time‐based tags for fiction movies: comparing experts to novices using a video labeling game

Estrada

Hildebrand

Boer

et al. 2016

Asso for Info Science & Tech

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The cultural heritage sector has embraced social tagging as a way to increase both access to online content and to engage users with their digital collections. In this article, we build on two current lines of research. (a) We use Waisda?, an existing labeling game, to add timebased annotations to content. (b) In this context, we investigate the role of experts in human-based computation (nichesourcing). We report on a small-scale experiment in which we applied Waisda? to content from film archives. We study the differences in the type of timebased tags between experts and novices for film clips in a crowdsourcing setting. The findings show high similarity in the number and type of tags (mostly factual). In the less frequent tags, however, experts used more domain-specific terms. We conclude that competitive games are not suited to elicit real expert-level descriptions. We also confirm that providing guidelines, based on conceptual frameworks that are more suited to moving images in a time-based fashion, could result in increasing the quality of the tags, thus allowing for creating more tag-based innovative services for online audiovisual heritage.

show abstract

Section: Related Workmentioning

confidence: 99%

Time‐based tags for fiction movies: comparing experts to novices using a video labeling game

Estrada

Hildebrand

Boer

et al. 2016

Asso for Info Science & Tech

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…However, there is another type of crowdsourcing that focuses on experts with domain knowledge in the subject-matter, also called nichesourcing. De Boer et al (2012) compares crowdsourcing to nichsourcing on three different parameters: 1 Crowdsourcing tasks are simple where nichesourcing tasks are knowledge-intensive. 2 Crowdsourcing products are determined by quantity where nichesourcing products are determined by quality.…”

Section: Crowdsourcingmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…2 Crowdsourcing products are determined by quantity where nichesourcing products are determined by quality. 3 The crowdsourcing resource pool is a large, anonymous and heterogeneous crowd, whereas the nichsourcing resource pool is a community of interest or practice of people who have a certain skill or expertise (de Boer et al, 2012).…”

Section: Crowdsourcingmentioning

confidence: 99%

Collection building amongst heritage amateurs

Roued-Cunliffe

2017

Collection Building

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

If you would like to write for this, or any other Emerald publication, then please use our Emerald for Authors service information about how to choose which publication to write for and submission guidelines are available for all. Please visit www.emeraldinsight.com/authors for more information. About Emerald www.emeraldinsight.comEmerald is a global publisher linking research and practice to the benefit of society. The company manages a portfolio of more than 290 journals and over 2,350 books and book series volumes, as well as providing an extensive range of online products and additional customer resources and services.Emerald is both COUNTER 4 and TRANSFER compliant. The organization is a partner of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) and also works with Portico and the LOCKSS initiative for digital archive preservation.*Related content and download information correct at time of download. Abstract Purpose -The purpose of this paper is to gather an overview of different research fields that study collection building amongst heritage amateurs (e.g. amateur archaeologists, family and local historians, etc.). Design/methodology/approach -First, the paper will define the term heritage amateur and then identify possible fields in which these groups and their collection building have been studied. A snowball procedure was used to collect material for the study. Findings -While there is an overlap between some of the subjects and fields examined, there is a potential for more collaboration resulting in a deeper understanding of collection building amongst heritage amateurs.Research limitations/implications -The term heritage amateur is not widely used, and the identification and collection of material for the review rely on the definition and understanding of this term and the groups included under it. Practical implications -This review of existing literature will benefit researchers and practitioners in the fields of education, information science, museums, libraries and archival studies, as well as the multidisciplinary area of heritage studies. Social implications -There is a growing institutional and political interest in making digital heritage collections available to the general public, and this paper argues that an important part of this is understanding how heritage amateurs already do this. Originality/value -This paper will connect narrow interest areas such as participatory heritage or serious leisure and show how their angles on heritage amateurs differ and compare.

show abstract

“…[21] show that tagging flowers with their botanical names could not be performed by a crowd of lay people. In these cases, nichesourcing [10], or employing crowds of experts to perform the annotations, can combine the advantages of using a crowd with the domain knowledge of experts. We define a generalizable methodology for crowdsourcing that we can then use to run nichesourcing experiments.…”

Section: State Of the Artmentioning

confidence: 99%

Crowdsourcing Disagreement for Collecting Semantic Annotation

Dumitrache¹

2015

The Semantic Web. Latest Advances and New Domains

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract. This paper proposes an approach to gathering semantic annotation, which rejects the notion that human interpretation can have a single ground truth, and is instead based on the observation that disagreement between annotators can signal ambiguity in the input text, as well as how the annotation task has been designed. The purpose of this research is to investigate whether disagreement-aware crowdsourcing is a scalable approach to gather semantic annotation across various tasks and domains. We propose a methodology for answering this question that involves, for each task and domain: defining the crowdsourcing setup, experimental data collection, and evaluating both the setup and the results. We present initial results for the task of medical relation extraction, and propose an evaluation plan for crowdsourcing semantic annotation for several tasks and domains.

show abstract

Nichesourcing: Harnessing the Power of Crowds of Experts

Cited by 34 publications

References 11 publications

Time‐based tags for fiction movies: comparing experts to novices using a video labeling game

Time‐based tags for fiction movies: comparing experts to novices using a video labeling game

Collection building amongst heritage amateurs

Crowdsourcing Disagreement for Collecting Semantic Annotation

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About