Electronic peer review: a large cohort teaching themselves?

[Abstract]: Electronic peer review can empower lecturers of large courses to produce rapid feedback, promote social interaction and encourage higher order learning for students. But what are the payoffs to educators? Do students recognise the benefits of such a system? Foundation Computing is one of the largest courses at the University of Southern Queensland. A system of electronic submission and peer reviewing with instructor moderation is now being used in this course. This system is innovative and unique and delivers benefits to students, lecturers and the University. This system has been evaluated, proven successful and is being considered for wider use

Fighting Authorship Linkability with Crowdsourcing

Massive amounts of contributed content -- including traditional literature, blogs, music, videos, reviews and tweets -- are available on the Internet today, with authors numbering in many millions. Textual information, such as product or service reviews, is an important and increasingly popular type of content that is being used as a foundation of many trendy community-based reviewing sites, such as TripAdvisor and Yelp. Some recent results have shown that, due partly to their specialized/topical nature, sets of reviews authored by the same person are readily linkable based on simple stylometric features. In practice, this means that individuals who author more than a few reviews under different accounts (whether within one site or across multiple sites) can be linked, which represents a significant loss of privacy. In this paper, we start by showing that the problem is actually worse than previously believed. We then explore ways to mitigate authorship linkability in community-based reviewing. We first attempt to harness the global power of crowdsourcing by engaging random strangers into the process of re-writing reviews. As our empirical results (obtained from Amazon Mechanical Turk) clearly demonstrate, crowdsourcing yields impressively sensible reviews that reflect sufficiently different stylometric characteristics such that prior stylometric linkability techniques become largely ineffective. We also consider using machine translation to automatically re-write reviews. Contrary to what was previously believed, our results show that translation decreases authorship linkability as the number of intermediate languages grows. Finally, we explore the combination of crowdsourcing and machine translation and report on the results

New Issues for New Methods: Ethical and Editorial Challenges for an Experimental Philosophy

This paper examines a constellation of ethical and editorial issues that have arisen since philosophers started to conduct, submit and publish empirical research. These issues encompass concerns over responsible authorship, fair treatment of human subjects, ethicality of experimental procedures, availability of data, unselective reporting and publishability of research findings. This study aims to assess whether the philosophical community has as yet successfully addressed such issues. To do so, the instructions for authors, submission process and published research papers of 29 main journals in philosophy have been considered and analyzed. In light of the evidence reported here, it is argued that the philosophical community has as yet failed to properly tackle such issues. The paper also delivers some recommendations for authors, reviewers and editors in the field

A Summary Report Prepared for the Office of the Governor, Boards and Commissions

This research project was undertaken by the author in partial fulfillment of a Master of Judicial Studies degree awarded December 2012 by the University of Nevada Reno and the National Judicial College. Although the project was funded by the author, the preparation of this report was funded by the University of Alaska Anchorage Justice Center. The author gratefully acknowledges the assistance of the Justice Center staff and faculty, especially André Rosay, Ph.D., Justice Center Director, Sharon Chamard, Ph.D., Associate Professor of Justice, and Barbara Armstrong, M.A., Research Associate. Points of view in this publication are those of the author and do not represent the official position or policies of the Justice Center, the University of Alaska Anchorage, the University of Nevada Reno, the National Judicial College, or the State of Alaska, Office of the Governor, Boards and Commissions and its staff.This report presents results of a survey of lay adjudicators in mixed-administrative tribunals in Alaska. Mixed administrative tribunals are appointed boards or commissions in which lay members decide legal issues with the involvement of a professional administrative law judge. This involvement varies in degree and methods, depending on the tribunal’s rules and statutes. The report describes reported participation, role perception, attitudes toward law, recruitment, and satisfaction with experience.List of Tables / The Purpose of this Research / The Participants / Respondents' Understanding of Member Duties / Participation in Decision-Making / Respondent Attitudes toward Law / Recruitment / Member Satisfaction / Maintaining the Strengths of Alaska's Mixed Tribunal