Szanse i słabości wykorzystania crowdsourcingu do analizy treści

Katarzyna Lisek

doi:10.18778/1733-8069.15.4.12

Authors

Katarzyna Lisek Uniwersytet Jagielloński, Instytut Socjologii, ul. Grodzka 52, pokój 68 (III brama), https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2431-8307

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.18778/1733-8069.15.4.12

Keywords:

crowdsourcing, content analysis, crowd, new technologies

Abstract

Content analysis has become a research method that is widely used not only in social sciences, but also in the humanities in general. The automation and computerization behind this method is gaining a lot of interest among researchers in Poland and around the world. New perspectives for the development of this field can be opened by the phenomenon of crowdsourcing – a virtual collaboration method whereby numerous anonymous users of new technologies are the participants. The first attempts to use this phenomenon in science were successful, both within exact sciences and the humanities. However, confirming the possibility of using crowdsourcing in content analysis requires further research and exploration.
The aim of this article is to present the attempt of using a pilot tool for crowdsourcing content coding. A reflection on the potential advantages and limitations of this approach will be offered, too. The author will provide a short characterization of the phenomenon of crowdsourcing and its application in science, as well as the description of the proposed tool. The article is concluded with the analysis of the opportunities and weaknesses that crowdsourcing can offer for the development of content analysis.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Author Biography

Katarzyna Lisek, Uniwersytet Jagielloński, Instytut Socjologii, ul. Grodzka 52, pokój 68 (III brama),

Katarzyna Lisek, magister socjologii, doktorantka w Zakładzie Socjologii Gospodarki, Edukacji i Metod Badań Społecznych Instytutu Socjologii Uniwersytetu Jagiellońskiego, ekspert Centrum Ewaluacji i Analiz Polityk Publicznych UJ. Jej zainteresowania naukowe to ewaluacja, polityki publiczne oparte na dowodach, innowacyjność oraz crowdsourcing.

References

Aristeidou Maria, Scaulon Eileen, Sharples Mike (2017) Profiles of Engagement in Online Communities of Citizen Science Participation. „Computers in Human Behavior”, vol. 74, s. 246–256.
Google Scholar

Azzam Tarek, Harman Elena (2015) Crowdsourcing for Quantifying Transcripts: An Exploratory Study.„Evaluation and Program Planning”, vol. 54, s. 63–73.
Google Scholar

Barbrook Richard (1997) Review: Collective net. „New Scientist” [dostęp 17 października 2019 r.]. Dostępny w Internecie: https://www.newscientist.com/article/mg15621125-800-review-collective-net/
Google Scholar

Behrend Tara S. i in. (2011) The Viability of Crowdsourcing for Survey Research. „Behavior Research Methods”, vol. 43, s. 800–813.
Google Scholar

Berry David (2011) The Computational Turn: Thinking about the Digital Humanities. „Culture Machine”, vol. 12, s. 1−22 .
Google Scholar

Bomba Radosław (2013) Narzędzia cyfrowe jako wyznacznik nowego paradygmatu badań humanistycznych [w:] Radomski Andrzej, Bomba Radosław, red., Zwrot cyfrowy w humanistyce. Internet/ Nowe Media/ Kultura 2.0. Lublin: E-naukowiec.
Google Scholar

Brabham Daren C. (2009) Crowdsourcing the Public Participation Process for Planning Projects. „Planning Theory”, vol. 8, s. 242–262.
Google Scholar

Brabham, Daren C. (2013) Crowdsourcing: A Model for Leveraging Online Communities [w:] Delwiche Aaron, Henderson Jennifer J., eds., The Participatory Cultures Handbook. New York: Routledge, s. 120–129.
Google Scholar

Broer Christian i in. (2016) Open Online Research: Developing Software and Method for Collaborative Interpretation. „Forum: Qualitative Social Research”, vol. 17 [dostęp 18 listopada 2019 r.]. Dostępny w Internecie: http://www.qualitative-research.net/index.php/fqs/article/view/2388/4039
Google Scholar

Brosz Maciej, Bryda Grzegorz, Siuda Piotr (2017) Od redaktorów: Big Data i CAQDAS a procedury badawcze w polu socjologii jakościowej. „Przegląd Socjologii Jakościowej”, t. 13, nr 2, s. 7–23.
Google Scholar

Bryda Grzegorz (2014) CAQDAS a badania jakościowe w praktyce. „Przegląd Socjologii Jakościowej”, t. 2, s. 12–38.
Google Scholar

Cranshaw Justin, Kittur Aniket (2011) The Polymath Project: Lessons from a Successful Online Collaboration in Mathematics. „Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI ‘11)”, s. 1865–1874.
Google Scholar

Davies Norman (2015) Szlak Nadziei. Armia Andersa. Marsz przez trzy kontynenty. Przełożyły Aleksandra Zych, Iwona Zych. Warszawa: Rosikon Press, s. 5–6.
Google Scholar

Dzięglewski Mariusz (2017) CAQDAS w badaniach digitalizacji i odbioru dziedzictwa kulturowego. Korzyści i ograniczenia. „Przegląd Socjologii Jakościowej”, t. 13, nr 2, s. 24–45.
Google Scholar

Eickhoff Carsten i in. (2014) Quality through Flow and Immersion: Gamifying Crowdsourced Relevance Assessments. „Proceedings of the 35th international ACM SIGIR conference on Research and Development in Information Retrieval”, s. 871–880.
Google Scholar

Estelles-Arolas Enrique, Gonzáles-Ladrón-de-Guevara Fernando (2012) Towards an Integrated Crowdsourcing Definition. „Journal of Information Science”, vol. 38, s. 189–200.
Google Scholar

Eveleigh Alexandra i in. (2013) “I want to be a capitan! I want to be a capitan!”: Gamification in the Old Weather Citizen Science Project. „Proceedings of the First International Conference on Gameful Design, Research, and Applications”, s. 79–82.
Google Scholar

Franzoni Chiara, Sauermann Henry (2014) Crowd Science: The Organization of Scientific Research in Open Collaborative Projects. „Research Policy”, vol. 43, s. 1–20.
Google Scholar

Gibbs Graham (2011) Analizowanie danych jakościowych. Przełożyła Maja Brzozowska-Brywczyńska. Warszawa: Wydawnictwo Naukowe PWN.
Google Scholar

Goban-Klas Tomasz (2004) Media i komunikowanie masowe: teorie i analizy prasy, radia, telewizji i Internetu. Warszawa: Wydawnictwo Naukowe PWN.
Google Scholar

Gregory Amanda, Atkins Jonathan (2018) Community Operational Research and Citizen Science: Two Icons in Need of Each Other? „European Journal of Operational Research”, vol. 269, s. 1111–1124.
Google Scholar

Howe Jeff (2006) The Rise of Crowdsourcing. „Wired Magazine”, vol. 14, s. 1−4.
Google Scholar

Hutt Hugo i in. (2013) How Clumpy Is My Image? Evaluating Crowdsourced Annotation Tasks. „Computational Intelligence (UKCI), 13th UK Workshop”, s.136–143.
Google Scholar

Kim Jinseop S. i in. (2014) Space-time Wiring Specificity Supports Direction Selectivity in the Retina. „Nature”, vol. 509, s. 331–348.
Google Scholar

Krippendorff Klaus (2004) Content Analysis: An Introduction to Its Methodology. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications.
Google Scholar

Lévy Pierre (1997) Collective Intelligence: Mankind’s Emerging World in Cyberspace . Cambridge: Perseus Books.
Google Scholar

Maj Agnieszka (2013) Analiza treści [w:] Makowska Marta, red., Analiza danych zastanych. Warszawa: Wydawnictwo Naukowe Scholar, s. 127–147.
Google Scholar

Niedbalski Jakub (2013) CAQDAS – oprogramowanie do komputerowego wspomagania analizy danych jakościowych. Historia, ewolucja i przyszłość. „Przegląd Socjologiczny”, t. 62, s. 153–166.
Google Scholar

Ridge Mia (2011) Playing with Difficult Objects: Game Designs to Improve Museum Collections [w:] Trant J, Bearman D., eds., Museums and the Web 2011: Proceedings. Toronto: Archives & Museum Informatics, s. 3−10.
Google Scholar

Robbins Stuart J. i in. (2014) The Variability of Crater Identification among Expert and Community Crater Analysts. „Icarus”, vol. 234, s. 109–131.
Google Scholar

Ross Joel i in. (2010) Who are the Crowdworkers? Shifting Demographic in Mechanical Turk. „Proceedings of the 28th International Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, CHI 2010, Extended Abstracts Volume”, s. 2863–2872.
Google Scholar

Schenk Eric, Guittard Claude (2011) Towards a Characterization of Crowdsourcing Practices. „Journal of Innovation Economics & Management”, vol. 7, s. 93–107.
Google Scholar

Surowiecki James (2010) Mądrość tłumu. Większość ma rację w ekonomii, biznesie i polityce. Przełożyła Katarzyna Rojek. Gliwice: OnePress.
Google Scholar

Troszyński Marek, Wawer Aleksander (2017) Czy komputer rozpozna hejtera? Wykorzystanie uczenia maszynowego (ML) w jakościowej analizie danych. „Przegląd Socjologii Jakościowej”, t. 13, nr 2, s. 62–80.
Google Scholar

Wallance Rebekah D., Bargeron Charles T. (2014) Identifying Invasive Species in Real Time: Early Detection and Distribution Mapping System (EDDMapS) and Other Mapping Tools [w:] Ziska Lewis H., Dukes Jeffery S., eds., Invasive Species and Global Climate Change. Oxfordshire: CABI, s. 220–231.
Google Scholar

Wexler Mark N. (2011) Reconfiguring the Sociology of the Crowd: Exploring Crowdsourcing. „The International Journal of Sociology and Social Policy”, vol. 31, s. 6–20.
Google Scholar

White Marilyn D., Marsh Emily (2006) Content Analysis: A Flexible Methodology. „Library Trends”, vol. 55, s. 22–45.
Google Scholar

Woolley Anita W. i in. (2010) Evidence for a collective intelligence factor in the performance of human groups. „Science”, vol. 330, s. 686 688.
Google Scholar

Zhao Yuxiang, Zhu Qinghua (2014) Evaluation on crowdsourcing research: Current status and future direction. „Information Systems Frontiers”, vol. 16, s. 417–434.
Google Scholar