[open-science] IPCC report

Wed Oct 2 15:09:25 UTC 2013

Daniel suggests the following for the crowdcrafting application:

>
> * Each citizen is given a reference. and asked "can you read this"
>
> […]
>
> * they click questions such as "is this paper on a public site?" "is it the publisher
> site?" "can you access the full-text?" "if not, how much does it cost?" "please save
> the URL"
>

I don’t know if this forum is the right place to discuss these details; maybe one should put up an EtherPad or Google Doc  to that effet. Anyway, I’ll go ahead.

I don’t have any concrete experience with crowdcrafting, only a knowledge derived from reading about some projects, mainly Galaxy Zoo, and I had a look at Ross Mounce’s app for OA journals copyright policies (a subject I know very well).

All I can say is that different people will come up with different answers to these questions; some will find an OA version, others won’t. And I know, because I do it on a regular basis for a journal, that OA versions are sometimes quite hard to find.

My point is that I don’t know what would be the quality of a survey in which each reference is checked by only one person. In Galaxy Zoo, for instance, they combine answers from many participants and empirically determined thresholds (number of participants and % of agreement) for an answer to be considered reliable (in their case, as reliable as what would be obtained by a trained astrophysicist).

Marc Couture

De : open-science-bounces at lists.okfn.org [mailto:open-science-bounces at lists.okfn.org] De la part de Daniel Lombraña González
Envoyé : 2 octobre 2013 04:15
À : Peter Murray-Rust
Cc : open-science; okfn-discuss
Objet : Re: [open-science] IPCC report

Hi Peter,

On Wed, Oct 2, 2013 at 9:57 AM, Peter Murray-Rust <pm286 at cam.ac.uk<mailto:pm286 at cam.ac.uk>> wrote:
Great,
I'll probably try to hack bits of the report today.

Nice!

The way I see it is something like:
* Crowdcrafting is given 9000 references:
* Each citizen is given a reference. and asked "can you read this"
* they are expected to paste the text into Google or some other search engine (maybe Microsoft Academic Search)

In the application I mentioned before, I basically avoid the copy&paste action by giving a button that will directly do the search in Google Scholar in a new tab. You can adapt it easily to any service :-)
* they click questions such as "is this paper on a public site?" "is it the publisher site?" "can you access the full-text?" "if not, how much does it cost?" "please save the URL"

It makes a lot of sense :-) Once the user has all that info, they will click a button with the Save URL or Send report, and a new task will be loaded for them.

and repeat.  It's up to our app to keep track of the results.

Yep! You will be able to get all the answers via JavaScript, or if you prefer, download them, do the statistics first, and then generate the output. This is up to you to decide how do you want to achieve it.

There's slightly more cut and paste than normal, but many citizens should have high motivation. My guess it will take about 0.5-3 mins. We may need notes on how to navigate some journals. Their interfaces are awful.

That's something you can address in the tutorial. Every CrowdCrafting.org application can have one, so all you have to do is to create one for yours :-)

We also need a wiki/mail - e.g. how do we find the cost for Journal X...

That's something CrowdCrafting does not have, but there should be free Wikis or Etherpads to coordinate yourself.

I think it could be exciting, rapid and very worthwhile.

Indeed! If promoted well, you will get a lot of people!

Cheers,

Daniel
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.okfn.org/pipermail/open-science/attachments/20131002/172e2346/attachment-0001.html>