Relación entre el crowdsourcing y la inteligencia colectiva: el caso de los sistemas de etiquetado social

El crowdsourcing es un término acuñado recientemente que hace referencia a un tipo de iniciativas que se dan en Internet. En estas iniciativas, alguien, ya sea una empresa, una persona o una institucion, propone a la multitud de Internet la realización de una tarea a cambio de una recompensa. Para que estas iniciativas se puedan llevar a cabo, Internet, y más concretamente, el desarrollo de la Web 2.0, ha sido fundamental. Internet, además de suponer la base tecnológica sobre la que se asienta el crowdsourcing, permite a este tipo de iniciativas tener acceso a cientos de miles de individuos de cualquier parte del mundo. Al haber sido un término acuñado recientemente, la literatura existente es escasa, realidad que va subsanándose paulatinamente. Además, las fronteras conceptuales del término son difusas. Por esta razón, muchas veces se confunde el crowdsourcing con procesos relacionados aunque no exactamente iguales, como la innovación abierta, la co-creación o la inteligencia colectiva. La presente tesis tiene como objetivo clarificar cual es exactamente la relación existente entre el crowdsourcing y uno de estos fenómenos: la inteligencia colectiva. Con este fin, se analizarán los sistemas de etiquetado social, una aplicación Web 2.0 claramente perteneciente al ámbito de la Inteligencia Colectiva, para observar las diferencias y semejanzas entre ésta y el crowdsourcing. En el camino que se recorre para identificar y analizar esta relación, se alcanzan otros hitos relevantes que ayudan a conseguir el objetivo de la tesis. En lo que al crowdsourcing respecta, se ha definido este término en base a ocho elementos, lo que facilita la identificación de qué es o no crowdsourcing. También se ha desarrollado una tipología de iniciativas de crowdsourcing en base a otras tipologías propuestas por diferentes autores. En cuanto a los sistemas de etiquetado social, se ha analizado y descrito el uso que hacen los usuarios de las etiquetas que describen los recursos de Internet, además de explicar como estos sistemas pueden favorecer los procesos de investigación colaborativos.Estellés Arolas, E. (2013). Relación entre el crowdsourcing y la inteligencia colectiva: el caso de los sistemas de etiquetado social [Tesis doctoral no publicada]. Universitat Politècnica de València. https://doi.org/10.4995/Thesis/10251/31661TESI

Protocol: A literature review about the use of crowdsourcing in educational environments

[EN] The objective with the protocol described in this paper is to review the existing literature in relation to the implementation of crowdsourcing in educational environments. It seeks to give answer to 4 questions. First, it seeks to answer the question of which kind of crowdsourcing initiatives are more appropriate to be used for educational activities. In second place it’s important to find out whether there is any particular discipline in which crowdsourcing, by its nature, can be applied more naturally. Third, it seeks to identify which factors influence both positively and negatively in the teaching/learning experience using crowdsourcing. Finally, the last question to answer, that implies the mentioned before, is interested in finding out whether crowdsourcing is an appropriate instrument to facilitate the teaching / learning.[ES] Con el protocolo que se describe a continuación, se pretende revisar la literatura existente en lo relacionado con la aplicación del crowdsourcing en el ámbito educativo. Se busca principalmente responder a 4 preguntas. En primer lugar, se busca responder a la pregunta de qué tipo de iniciativas de crowdsourcing son más apropiadas para usarse en el ámbito educativo (por lo encontrado en la revisión). También interesa averiguar si existe alguna disciplina en concreto en la que el crowdsourcing, por sus características, se puede aplicar de forma más natural. Interesa también identificar que factores influyen, tanto de manera positiva como negativa en el proceso de enseñanza/aprendizaje usando el crowd-sourcing. En definitiva, interesa averiguar si el crowdsourcing es un instrumento apropiado para facilitar los procesos de enseñanza/aprendizajeEstellés Arolas, E. (2016). Protocolo: Una revisión de la literatura sobre el uso del crowdsourcing en entornos educativos. Working Papers on Operations Management. 7(2):89-96. doi:10.4995/wpom.v7i2.6069SWORD89967

Diigo: social bookmarking, basic support for collaborative learning and research

La web 2.0 ha originado nuevas aplicaciones, tales como los Sistemas de Marcadores Sociales (SBS) con una marcada función socializadora, centrada no tanto en las relaciones entre los usuarios como en proporcionarles las herramientas necesarias para manejar y gestionar información que posteriormente puede ser compartida. En el presente artículo se definen los SBS como aplicaciones web que ayudan a almacenar, clasificar, organizar, describir y compartir información multiformato mediante enlaces a páginas web, blogs, imágenes, wikis, vídeos y podcasts de interés, destacando sus ventajas para favorecer el trabajo grupal. En concreto, se estudia Diigo y sus aportaciones como herramienta metacognitiva, que permite visibilizar el modo de aprender, pensar y elaborar el conocimiento que cada sujeto posee a partir de la información que selecciona, organiza y categoriza, incrementando su valor al compartirla. Facilita el aprendizaje y la investigación colaborativa, al compartir las etiquetas que describen los recursos convirtiéndolos en unidades valiosas. Propicia la cohexión de grupos de investigación mediante la navegación por la información referenciada y etiquetada por otros, a la que cualquiera puede suscribirse y reetiquetar incorporando otros matices. Favorece la gestión de la información recabada en diferentes fases de una investigación. En definitiva, propicia el trabajo colaborativo al unir las sinérgias de un determinado grupo de investigación, agilizando la difusión de ideas entre campos interdisciplinares y contribuyendo a la construcción colectiva del conocimiento.Web 2.0 has originated new applications, like the Social Bookmarking Systems (SBS) with remarkable socializing features, Rather than focusing on the relationship between users, it provides users with the necessary tools to manage and use information that can be later shared. In this article SBS are defined as web applications that can help to store, classify, organize, describe and share multi-format information through links to web sites, blogs, images, wikis, videos and podcasts of interest, emphasizing their advantages for supporting collaborative work. Specifically, Diigo and its contributions will be studied as a metacognitive tool wich makes visible the way each user learns, thinks and develops the knowledge obtained from the information he selects, organizes and categorizes, incrementing its value when sharing it. It facilitates collaborative learning and research through the sharing of tags that describe marked resources giving them high value. Diigo favours the research groups connection thanks to the browsing of the referenced information that has been tagged by others. Everybody can suscribe himself to that information, re-tagging it and adding new nuances. Also favours the information management in the different research phases. Ultimately, it propitiates the collaborative work thanks to the union of the different synergies of the members team, speeding the broadcast of the ideas between interdisciplinary fields and contributing to the collective knowledge development

Bibliogifts at LibGen? A study of a text-sharing platform driven by biblioleaks and crowdsourcing

Research papers disseminate the knowledge produced by the scientific community. Access to this literature is crucial for researchers and the general public. Apparently 'bibliogifts' are available online for free from text-sharing platforms. However, little is known about such platforms. What is the size of the underlying digital libraries? What are the topics covered? Where do these documents originally come from? This paper reports a study of the Library Genesis platform (LibGen). The 25 million documents (42 terabytes) it hosts and distributes for free are mostly research papers, textbooks, and books in English. The paper collection stems from isolated but massive paper uploads (71%) in line with a 'biblioleaks' scenario, as well as from daily crowdsourcing (29%) by worldwide users of platforms such as Reddit Scholar and Sci-Hub. By relating the DOIs registered at CrossRef and those cached at LibGen, this study reveals that 36% of all DOI papers are available for free at LibGen. This figure is even higher (68%) for three major publishers: Elsevier, Springer, and Wiley. More research is needed to understand to what extent researchers and the general public have recourse to such text-sharing platforms, and why

Towards an integrated crowdsourcing definition

Crowdsourcing is a relatively recent concept that encompasses many practices. This diversity leads to the blurring of the limits of crowdsourcing that may be identified virtually with any type of internet-based collaborative activity, such as co-creation or user innovation. Varying definitions of crowdsourcing exist, and therefore some authors present certain specific examples of crowdsourcing as paradigmatic, while others present the same examples as the opposite. In this article, existing definitions of crowdsourcing are analysed to extract common elements and to establish the basic characteristics of any crowdsourcing initiative. Based on these existing definitions, an exhaustive and consistent definition for crowdsourcing is presented and contrasted in 11 cases.Estelles Arolas, E.; González-Ladrón-De-Guevara, F. (2012). Towards an integrated crowdsourcing definition. Journal of Information Science. 32(2):189-200. doi:10.1177/0165551512437638S189200322Vukovic, M., & Bartolini, C. (2010). Towards a Research Agenda for Enterprise Crowdsourcing. Leveraging Applications of Formal Methods, Verification, and Validation, 425-434. doi:10.1007/978-3-642-16558-0_36Brabham, D. C. (2008). Crowdsourcing as a Model for Problem Solving. Convergence: The International Journal of Research into New Media Technologies, 14(1), 75-90. doi:10.1177/1354856507084420Vukovic, M. (2009). Crowdsourcing for Enterprises. 2009 Congress on Services - I. doi:10.1109/services-i.2009.56Doan, A., Ramakrishnan, R., & Halevy, A. Y. (2011). Crowdsourcing systems on the World-Wide Web. Communications of the ACM, 54(4), 86. doi:10.1145/1924421.1924442Brabham, D. C. (2008). Moving the crowd at iStockphoto: The composition of the crowd and motivations for participation in a crowdsourcing application. First Monday, 13(6). doi:10.5210/fm.v13i6.2159Huberman, B. A., Romero, D. M., & Wu, F. (2009). Crowdsourcing, attention and productivity. Journal of Information Science, 35(6), 758-765. doi:10.1177/0165551509346786Andriole, S. J. (2010). Business impact of Web 2.0 technologies. Communications of the ACM, 53(12), 67. doi:10.1145/1859204.1859225Denyer, D., Tranfield, D., & van Aken, J. E. (2008). Developing Design Propositions through Research Synthesis. Organization Studies, 29(3), 393-413. doi:10.1177/0170840607088020Egger, M., Smith, G. D., & Altman, D. G. (Eds.). (2001). Systematic Reviews in Health Care. doi:10.1002/9780470693926Tatarkiewicz, W. (1980). A History of Six Ideas. doi:10.1007/978-94-009-8805-7Cosma, G., & Joy, M. (2008). Towards a Definition of Source-Code Plagiarism. IEEE Transactions on Education, 51(2), 195-200. doi:10.1109/te.2007.906776Brabham, D. C. (2009). Crowdsourcing the Public Participation Process for Planning Projects. Planning Theory, 8(3), 242-262. doi:10.1177/1473095209104824Alonso, O., & Lease, M. (2011). Crowdsourcing 101. Proceedings of the fourth ACM international conference on Web search and data mining - WSDM ’11. doi:10.1145/1935826.1935831Bederson, B. B., & Quinn, A. J. (2011). Web workers unite! addressing challenges of online laborers. Proceedings of the 2011 annual conference extended abstracts on Human factors in computing systems - CHI EA ’11. doi:10.1145/1979742.1979606Grier, D. A. (2011). Not for All Markets. Computer, 44(5), 6-8. doi:10.1109/mc.2011.155Heer, J., & Bostock, M. (2010). Crowdsourcing graphical perception. Proceedings of the 28th international conference on Human factors in computing systems - CHI ’10. doi:10.1145/1753326.1753357Heymann, P., & Garcia-Molina, H. (2011). Turkalytics. Proceedings of the 20th international conference on World wide web - WWW ’11. doi:10.1145/1963405.1963473Kazai, G. (2011). In Search of Quality in Crowdsourcing for Search Engine Evaluation. Advances in Information Retrieval, 165-176. doi:10.1007/978-3-642-20161-5_17La Vecchia, G., & Cisternino, A. (2010). Collaborative Workforce, Business Process Crowdsourcing as an Alternative of BPO. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, 425-430. doi:10.1007/978-3-642-16985-4_40Liu, E., & Porter, T. (2010). Culture and KM in China. VINE, 40(3/4), 326-333. doi:10.1108/03055721011071449Oliveira, F., Ramos, I., & Santos, L. (2010). Definition of a Crowdsourcing Innovation Service for the European SMEs. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, 412-416. doi:10.1007/978-3-642-16985-4_37Porta, M., House, B., Buckley, L., & Blitz, A. (2008). Value 2.0: eight new rules for creating and capturing value from innovative technologies. Strategy & Leadership, 36(4), 10-18. doi:10.1108/10878570810888713Ribiere, V. M., & Tuggle, F. D. (Doug). (2010). Fostering innovation with KM 2.0. VINE, 40(1), 90-101. doi:10.1108/03055721011024955Sloane, P. (2011). The brave new world of open innovation. Strategic Direction, 27(5), 3-4. doi:10.1108/02580541111125725Wexler, M. N. (2011). Reconfiguring the sociology of the crowd: exploring crowdsourcing. International Journal of Sociology and Social Policy, 31(1/2), 6-20. doi:10.1108/01443331111104779Whitla, P. (2009). Crowdsourcing and Its Application in Marketing Activities. Contemporary Management Research, 5(1). doi:10.7903/cmr.1145Yang, J., Adamic, L. A., & Ackerman, M. S. (2008). Crowdsourcing and knowledge sharing. Proceedings of the 9th ACM conference on Electronic commerce - EC ’08. doi:10.1145/1386790.1386829Brabham, D. C. (2010). MOVING THE CROWD AT THREADLESS. Information, Communication & Society, 13(8), 1122-1145. doi:10.1080/13691181003624090Giudice, K. D. (2010). Crowdsourcing credibility: The impact of audience feedback on Web page credibility. Proceedings of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 47(1), 1-9. doi:10.1002/meet.14504701099Stewart, O., Huerta, J. M., & Sader, M. (2009). Designing crowdsourcing community for the enterprise. Proceedings of the ACM SIGKDD Workshop on Human Computation - HCOMP ’09. doi:10.1145/1600150.1600168Maslow, A. H. (1943). A theory of human motivation. Psychological Review, 50(4), 370-396. doi:10.1037/h0054346Veal, A. J. (Ed.). (2002). Leisure and tourism policy and planning. doi:10.1079/9780851995465.0000Dahlander, L., & Gann, D. M. (2010). How open is innovation? Research Policy, 39(6), 699-709. doi:10.1016/j.respol.2010.01.01

Online, on call: : the spread of digitally-organised just-in-time working and its implications for standard employment models

This article questions whether the dominant policy discourse, in which a normative model of standard employment is counterposed to ‘non-standard’ or ‘atypical’ employment, enables us to capture the diversity of fluid labour markets in which work is dynamically reshaped in an interaction between different kinds of employment status and work organisation. Drawing on surveys in the UK, Germany, Sweden and the Netherlands that investigate work managed via online platforms (‘crowdwork’) and associated practices, it demonstrates that crowdwork represents part of a continuum. Not only do most crowd workers combine work for online platforms with other forms of work or income generation, but also many of the ICT-related practices associated with crowdwork are widespread across the rest of the labour market where a growing number of workers are ‘logged’. Future research should not just focus on crowdworkers as a special case but on new patterns of work organisation in the regular workforce.Peer reviewe