Collaborative semantic tagging and annotation systems

Hunter, Jane

doi:10.1002/aris.2009.1440430111

Cited by 26 publications

(33 citation statements)

References 74 publications

(95 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The term "annotation" has different meanings to different communities [8]. In the literary tradition, it is used as an equivalent of "glossing.…”

Section: Annotations and Annotation Behaviourmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Pre-focused annotation (8) ➔ Bookmarking ➔ Open coding (initial coding)--tagging ➔ Commenting (memos, pending research tasks)…”

Section: (Iii) (A)mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Pre-corpus creation (8,9) Focused corpus selection (10) Exploratory search (4,6) Complementing corpus (11) Access and consultation (14,15) Interpretation (19) Answer RQ (20) …”

Section: (Iii) (A)mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Find keywords (2) Find/create Datasets (8,9,11) Figure 1: A process model of scholarly media annotation (numbers in parentheses correspond to Table 1) 4. FINDINGS Annotation activities in media scholarly research Table 1 summarizes the 21 activities identified in our first part of the analysis.…”

Section: Presentation (A) (I) (Ii) (B)mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

A Process Model of Scholarly Media Annotation

Melgar

Koolen

Huurdeman

et al. 2017

Proceedings of the 2017 Conference on Conference Human Information Interaction and Retrieval

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Annotation has been identified as one of the "scholarly primitives", and plays a pivotal role in facilitating access to audio-visual (AV) media in a scholarly context. However, there is a lack of understanding of scholars' annotation needs and behavior. This paper is part of a group of studies aiming to understand how to improve annotation support of AV media, in order to facilitate research activities of media scholars and other scholars who make intensive use of AV media. The main findings confirm previous research discerning stages in media scholars' research processes, and indicate a great variety of research activities which occur in a non-linear order. Our studies also show that different annotation activities occur along those stages. The main contribution of this paper is a generic process model capturing AV media annotation, potentially applicable to a variety of research use cases in a scholarly context.

show abstract

“…The term "annotation" has different meanings to different communities [8]. In the literary tradition, it is used as an equivalent of "glossing.…”

Section: Annotations and Annotation Behaviourmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Pre-focused annotation (8) ➔ Bookmarking ➔ Open coding (initial coding)--tagging ➔ Commenting (memos, pending research tasks)…”

Section: (Iii) (A)mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Pre-corpus creation (8,9) Focused corpus selection (10) Exploratory search (4,6) Complementing corpus (11) Access and consultation (14,15) Interpretation (19) Answer RQ (20) …”

Section: (Iii) (A)mentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Presentation (A) (I) (Ii) (B)mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

A Process Model of Scholarly Media Annotation

Melgar

Koolen

Huurdeman

et al. 2017

Proceedings of the 2017 Conference on Conference Human Information Interaction and Retrieval

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…We will not truly benefit from the "wisdom of crowds". From the literature on collaborative information seeking, it is also clear that a wider spectrum of topics need to be covered such as collaborative information retrieval (Karamuftuoglu 1998), communities of practice, virtual communities and virtual learning environments (Ellis, Oldridge & Vasconcelos 2003), tasked-based information seeking (Vakkari 2003), collaborative information behaviour in large groups (Richter, Bray & Dutton 2010), information seeking in order to produce information (Hirsh & Dinkelacker 2004), group communication theory and research (Frey 1999), social intelligence (Cronin & Davenport 1993), collaboratories (Finholt 2002), workplace studies and technological change (Garcia et al 2006), the importance of trust (Marsh & Dibben 2003), scholarship and disciplinary practices (Palmer & Cragin 2008), collaborative tagging (Hunter 2009) -and the realities of emotion and affect (Nahl 2007). The latter is raising interest in studies of information behaviour but not necessarily with regard to collaboration (Nahl & Bilal 2007).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Collaboration and personal information management (PIM)

Fourie

2012

Library Hi Tech

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Please note this is not the final version that appeared in Library Hi Tech, 2011Abstract Purpose -The column explores the potential of personal information management (PIM) and reference management. This contribution focuses on collaboration: the issues that need to be addressed in planning, the human component in collaborative information seeking, and issues for research by librarians.Design/methodology/approach -The column is written against the background of research from information behaviour, PIM, collaborative information seeking and collaborative work.Findings -There is growing emphasis on collaboration in information seeking, learning and work. PIM and reference management practices and their supporting software can greatly support this. There are, however, many planning / conceptual issues as well as the human component to recon with.Originality/value -Although much has been published on developments in PIM and reference management, there is limited coverage of collaboration and PIM and reference management.

show abstract

Conceptual syntagmatic associations in user tagging

Yoon

2012

Acta Anaesthesiol Scand

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study aimed to integrate the linguistic theory of syntagmatic relations and the concept of topic and comment into an empirical analysis of user tagging. User tags on documents in a social bookmarking site reflect a user's views of an information object, which can augment the content description and provide more effective representation of information. The study presents a study of tag analysis to uncover semantic relations among tag terms implicit in user tagging. The objective was to identify the syntagmatic semantic cores of topic and comment in user tags evidenced by the meaning attached to the information object by users. The study focused on syntagmatic relations, which were based on the way in which terms were used within the information content among users. Analysis of descriptive tag terms found three primary categories of concepts: content-topic, content-comment, and context of use. The relations among terms within a group and between the contenttopic and content-comment groups were determined by inferring user meaning from the user notes and from the context of the source text. Intergroup relations showed syntagmatic associations between the topic and comment, whereas intragroup relations were more general but were limited in the document context. The findings are discussed with regard to the semantics of concepts and relations in user tagging. An implication of syntagmatic relations to information search suggests that concepts can be combined by a specific association in the context of the actual use of terms.

show abstract

Collaborative semantic tagging and annotation systems

Cited by 26 publications

References 74 publications

A Process Model of Scholarly Media Annotation

A Process Model of Scholarly Media Annotation

Collaboration and personal information management (PIM)

Conceptual syntagmatic associations in user tagging

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About