@article {9998, title = {Assessment, Usability, and Sociocultural Impacts of DataONE: A Global Research Data Cyberinfrastructure Initiative}, journal = {International Journal of Digital Curation}, volume = {16}, year = {2021}, month = {04/2021}, abstract = {

DataONE, funded from 2009-2019 by the U.S. National Science Foundation, is an early example of a large-scale project that built both a cyberinfrastructure and culture of data discovery, sharing, and reuse. DataONE used a Working Group model, where a diverse group of participants collaborated on targeted research and development activities to achieve broader project goals. This article summarizes the work carried out by two of DataONE{\textquoteright}s working groups: Usability \& Assessment (2009-2019) and Sociocultural Issues (2009-2014). The activities of these working groups provide a unique longitudinal look at how scientists, librarians, and other key stakeholders engaged in convergence research to identify and analyze practices around research data management through the development of boundary objects, an iterative assessment program, and reflection. Members of the working groups disseminated their findings widely in papers, presentations, and datasets, reaching international audiences through publications in 25 different journals and presentations to over 5,000 people at interdisciplinary venues. The working groups helped inform the DataONE cyberinfrastructure and influenced the evolving data management landscape. By studying working groups over time, the paper also presents lessons learned about the working group model for global large-scale projects that bring together participants from multiple disciplines and communities in convergence research.

}, doi = {10.2218/ijdc.v16i1.678 }, author = {Robert J. Sandusky and Suzie Allard and Lynn Baird and Leah Cannon and Kevin Crowston and Amy Forrester and Bruce Grant and Rachael Hu and Robert Olendorf and Danielle Pollock and Alison Specht and Carol Tenopir and Rachel Volentine} } @article {9998, title = {Examining Open Innovation in Science (OIS): What Open Innovation can and cannot offer the science of science}, journal = {Innovation: Organization \& Management}, year = {2021}, abstract = {

Scholars across disciplines increasingly hear calls for more open and collaborative approaches to scientific research. The concept of Open Innovation in Science (OIS) provides a framework that integrates dispersed research efforts aiming to understand the antecedents, contingencies, and consequences of applying open and collaborative research practices. While the OIS framework has already been taken up by science of science scholars, its conceptual underpinnings require further specification. In this essay, we critically examine the OIS concept and bring to light two key aspects: 1) how OIS builds upon Open Innovation (OI) research by adopting its attention to boundary-crossing knowledge flows and by adapting other concepts developed and researched in OI to the science context as exemplified by two OIS cases in the area of research funding; 2) how OIS conceptualises knowledge flows across boundaries. While OI typically focuses on well-defined organizational boundaries, we argue that blurry and even invisible boundaries between communities of practice may more strongly constrain flows of knowledge related to openness and collaboration in science. Given the uptake of this concept, this essay brings needed clarity to the meaning of OIS, which has no particular normative orientation toward a close coupling between science and industry. We end by outlining the essay{\textquoteright}s contributions to OI and the science of science, as well as to science practitioners.

}, doi = {10.1080/14479338.2021.1999248}, author = {Susanne Beck and Marcel LaFlamme and Carsten Bergenholtz and Marcel Bogers and Tiare-Maria Brasseur and Marie-Louise Conradsen and Kevin Crowston and Diletta Di Marco and Agnes Effert and Despoina Filiou and Lars Frederiksen and Thomas Gillier and Marc Gruber and Carolin Haeussler and Karin Hoisl and Olga Kokshagina and Maria-Theresa Norn and Marion Poetz and Gernot Pruschak and Laia Pujol Priego and Agnieszka Radziwon and Alexander Ruser and Henry Sauermann and Sonali Shah and Julia Suess-Reyes and Christopher L. Tucci and Philipp Tuertscher and Jane Bj{\o}rn Vedel and Roberto Verganti and Jonathan Wareham and Sunny Mosangzi Xu} } @article {2021, title = {Imagine All the People: Citizen Science, Artificial Intelligence, and Computational Research}, year = {2021}, institution = {Computing Community Consortium (CCC)}, address = {Washington, DC}, abstract = {

Machine learning, artificial intelligence, and deep learning have advanced significantly over the past decade. Nonetheless, humans possess unique abilities such as creativity, intuition, context and abstraction, analytic problem solving, and detecting unusual events. To successfully tackle pressing scientific and societal challenges, we need the complementary capabilities of both humans and machines. The Federal Government could accelerate its priorities on multiple fronts through judicious integration of citizen science and crowdsourcing with artificial intelligence (AI), Internet of Things (IoT), and cloud strategies.

}, url = {https://cra.org/ccc/wp-content/uploads/sites/2/2021/03/CCC-TransitionPaperImagine-All-the-People.pdf}, author = {Lea A. Shanley and Lucy Fortson and Tanya Berger-Wolf and Kevin Crowston and Pietro Michelucci} } @article {9999, title = {Stages of motivation for contributing user-generated content: A theory and empirical test}, journal = {International Journal of Human-Computer Studies}, volume = {109}, year = {2018}, pages = {89-101}, publisher = {Syracuse University}, address = {Syracuse, NY}, abstract = {

User-generated content (UGC) projects involve large numbers of mostly unpaid contributors collaborating to create content. Motivation for such contributions has been an active area of research. In prior research, motivation for contribution to UGC has been considered a single, static and individual phenomenon. In this paper, we argue that it is instead three separate but interrelated phenomena. Using the theory of helping behaviour as a framework and integrating social movement theory, we propose a stage theory that distinguishes three separate sets (initial, sustained and meta) of motivations for participation in UGC. We test this theory using a data set from a Wikimedia Editor Survey (Wikimedia Foundation, 2011). The results suggest several opportunities for further refinement of the theory but provide support for the main hypothesis, that different stages of contribution have distinct motives. The theory has implications for both researchers and practitioners who manage UGC projects.

}, doi = {10.1016/j.ijhcs.2017.08.005 }, attachments = {https://crowston.syr.edu./sites/crowston.syr.edu/files/crowston\%20fagnot\%20to\%20distribute.pdf}, author = {Kevin Crowston and Fagnot, Isabelle} } @proceedings {crowston2012, title = {Amazon Mechanical Turk: A research tool for organizations and information systems scholars}, volume = {389}, year = {2012}, month = {12/2012}, pages = {210-221}, publisher = {Springer}, address = {Tampa, FL}, isbn = {978-3-642-35141-9}, issn = {1868-4238}, doi = {10.1007/978-3-642-35141-9}, attachments = {https://crowston.syr.edu./sites/crowston.syr.edu/files/3890210.pdf}, author = {Kevin Crowston}, editor = {Anol Bhattacherjee and Brian Fitzgerald} } @conference {369, title = {Integrated Customer-Focused Knowledge Portals: Design Challenges and Empirical Approaches}, booktitle = {Academy of Management Conference, OCIS Division}, year = {2011}, month = {8/2011}, address = {San Antonio, TX}, abstract = {Knowledge Portals (KPs) are highly integrative Knowledge Management Systems (KMS) that promise to synthesize widely dispersed knowledge and to interconnect individuals by functioning as a {\textquoteright}one-stop knowledge shop{\textquoteright}. Yet, in practice, KPs face major challenges, which are for the most part due to the intricacies of knowledge exchange being subjected to multi-faceted individual and social factors. At the same time, growing anecdotal evidence from case studies indicates KPs{\textquoteright} enormous potential. This paper makes an effort to more distinctly conceptualize KPs and emphasize a KP{\textquoteright}s role to unify networking and repository KMS features. The paper develops three major challenges to successful KP deployment, namely (1) knowledge integration, (2) sufficient participation, and (3) favorable organizational culture and validates these as applicable to KP through a review of 42 empirical papers. The paper concludes with suggestions towards a set of design principles for KP. }, attachments = {https://crowston.syr.edu./sites/crowston.syr.edu/files/14943.pdf}, author = {Claudia L{\"o}bbecke and Kevin Crowston and Nicolas Friederici} } @proceedings {Crowston:2008c, title = {The motivational arc of massive virtual collaboration}, year = {2008}, note = {Please refer to the more recent version of the paper. }, month = {1{\textendash}2 July}, address = {L{\"u}neberg, Germany}, abstract = {Massive virtual collaborations (MVC) involve large numbers of mostly unpaid contributors collectively creating new content. Wikipedia is the most dramatic example of MVC; smaller-scale examples include blogs and discussion groups and free/libre open source software (FLOSS) projects. In this paper, we propose a model of motivations for contribution to MVC that integrates various theoretical perspectives to extend prior work. Specifically, we distinguish three different levels of contribution to projects (initial, sustained and meta) and capture the dynamic and recursive effects of contributions on emergent individual and project states.}, attachments = {https://crowston.syr.edu./sites/crowston.syr.edu/files/MortivationalArc.pdf}, author = {Kevin Crowston and Fagnot, Isabelle} } @book {, title = {Virtual Operations and Agile Organizations: workshop proceedings }, year = {1997}, note = {European Agility Forum, August 21-22 1997}, publisher = {ASLIB}, organization = {ASLIB}, address = {Rotterdam, The Netherlands }, keywords = {Virtual Organization}, editor = {Bernhard Katzy and Kevin Crowston and Kumar, Kuldeep and van Fenema, P.} }