Synthesis Infrastructures - User contributions [en]

Talk:Social Systems

2022-11-12T17:54:10Z

Patel93:

==Open Notes==
Martin
* Reward contributions and how they affect behavior
* Collect few opinions on how the rewarding can be done, other examples and what worked or didn't work

Angelina:
* Questions about adoption
* Regulations (for example, in USA there's data open or they don't receive money anymore), in EU there's a proposal to evaluate researchers using diff metrics, such as openness

Sílvia
* old incentives, what are the ones in place besides reputation?
* What should we keep in mind when creating

Angelina
* replacing the old system would be detrimental to the adoption
* transfer their merits to the new system
* progressive adoption of new metrics in behavior that accommodates certain

Rafie
* metrics are used to "judge" researchers to allocate grants
* democratically incentives, but existing structures are not democratically enough

Jay (joining from the Interfaces group, adding some notes here for you)
* badges from open science are a social signal of participating in a new practice (analog would be Rescognito.com for knowledge synthesis)
* practical advice from studying the gamification literature may be valuable
* psychological and sociological literature on volunteering and altruism may also inspire ideas (I'm trying to think from different angles)

<br>

* Most of the incentives are monetary (there are social)
* researchers are not in a position to decide; they're put in the system
* funders can probably change the infrastructure and regulations

'''Q: stakeholders?'''
* Researchers
* grant funders
* publishing agencies
* Other: industry, taxpayers

'''Q - change coming from which stakeholders?'''
* Biggest US and European
* smaller foundations, not supper novel ideas, a lot of outliers in Web3
* researcher will move to web3 in 10 to 20
* Stepwise approach, led by biggest funder

*alternative view*: demonstrate the reality of sth, Web3 and Desci - opportunity to demonstrate structures and mechanisms working in a small scale, and showcasing to onboard larger organizations
* start small and demonstrate value

'''Push for the adoption of new systems:'''
* works but not optimal: some systems work great on a small scale, but scale to promote less nice behaviour
* Readiness of academia?
* otoh, early adopters don't need to be big

Nouran:
*HCI community: the driving force is actually the academics
* Tool building perspective: challenges?
* Reputation & interactions in online space: how can we build better tools to help users navigate these spaces without being afraid of their reputation

Martin Q - if we create spaces to allow researchers to come together away from their high reputation game, how do they tap into research initiatives and new funders and funding mechanisms?

Open Questions - validate assumptions for the system that should work on a bigger scale?
* how do we determine the systems that will work on a big scale without testing them on a large scale?
* Valerii shares his company approach: small-scale test, update the pre-existing model + ar

Open Questions?
''' spec out different funding/incentive models for sustaining the work of synthesis '''

'''developing incentive mechanisms for contributions to understanding the status of the knowledge frontier'''

'''incentive mechanisms for contributing and maintaining living lit reviews in both domains'''

Talk:Social Systems

2022-11-12T17:48:55Z

Patel93:

==Open Notes==
Martin
* Reward contributions and how they affect behavior
* Collect few opinions on how the rewarding can be done, other examples and what worked or didn't work

Angelina:
* Questions about adoption
* Regulations (for example, in USA there's data open or they don't receive money anymore), in EU there's a proposal to evaluate researchers using diff metrics, such as openness

Sílvia
* old incentives, what are the ones in place besides reputation?
* What should we keep in mind when creating

Angelina
* replacing the old system would be detrimental to the adoption
* transfer their merits to the new system
* progressive adoption of new metrics in behavior that accommodates certain

Rafie
* metrics are used to "judge" researchers to allocate grants
* democratically incentives, but existing structures are not democratically enough

Jay (joining from the Interfaces group, adding some notes here for you)
* badges from open science are a social signal of participating in a new practice (analog would be Rescognito.com for knowledge synthesis)
* practical advice from studying the gamification literature may be valuable
* psychological and sociological literature on volunteering and altruism may also inspire ideas (I'm trying to think from different angles)

* Most of the incentives are monetary (there are social)
* researchers are not in a position to decide; they're put in the system
* funders can probably change the infrastructure and regulations

'''Q: stakeholders?'''
* Researchers
* grant funders
* publishing agencies
* Other: industry, taxpayers

'''Q - change coming from which stakeholders?'''
* Biggest US and European
* smaller foundations, not supper novel ideas, a lot of outliers in Web3
* researcher will move to web3 in 10 to 20
* Stepwise approach, led by biggest funder

*alternative view*: demonstrate the reality of sth, Web3 and Desci - opportunity to demonstrate structures and mechanisms working in a small scale, and showcasing to onboard larger organizations
* start small and demonstrate value

'''Push for the adoption of new systems:'''
* works but not optimal: some systems work great on a small scale, but scale to promote less nice behaviour
* Readiness of academia?
* otoh, early adopters don't need to be big

Nouran:
*HCI community: the driving force is actually the academics
* Tool building perspective: challenges?
* Reputation & interactions in online space: how can we build better tools to help users navigate these spaces without being afraid of their reputation

Martin Q - if we create spaces to allow researchers to come together away from their high reputation game, how do they tap into research initiatives and new funders and funding mechanisms?

Open Questions - validate assumptions for the system that should work on a bigger scale?
* how do we determine the systems that will work on a big scale without testing them on a large scale?
* Valerii shares his company approach: small-scale test, update the pre-existing model + ar

Open Questions?
''' spec out different funding/incentive models for sustaining the work of synthesis '''

'''developing incentive mechanisms for contributions to understanding the status of the knowledge frontier'''

'''incentive mechanisms for contributing and maintaining living lit reviews in both domains'''

Interfaces

2022-11-12T15:32:17Z

Patel93: /* What */

{{Group
|Decription=How do we support richer forms of synthesis-oriented interaction with the existing bodies of research that transcend publications as the unit?
|Topics=Documents, HCI
|Discord Channel Name=#interfaces
|Discord Channel URL=https://discord.com/channels/1029514961782849607/1040386439575240704
|Facilitator=Jodi Schneider
|Members=Elianna DeSota, Jay Patel, Jodi Schneider, Jordan Wick, Joseph Chee Chang, Konrad Hinsen, Pao Siangliulue, Pooja Upadhyay, Arthur Perret
}}
[[Category:Group]]

== What ==

How do we support richer forms of synthesis-oriented interaction with the existing bodies of research that transcend publications as the unit?

Jordan Wick: We need to improve the UX of reading papers (not PDFs) in "single-player" mode.

Jodi: We really need narratives. Should we have databases instead of papers? I don't think that databases can take the place of papers.

Related to:
* [[Related To::HCI]]