GLAM-WIKI 2015/Proposals/Science GLAM - lessons from two Wiki residences

This is an accepted submission for GLAM-WIKI 2015.

Submission no. GW15.1024

Title of the submission

Type of submission

presentation, could be part of panel etc

Author of the submission

John Byrne , Gebruiker:Johnbod & Wiki CRUK John (overleg) 25 feb 2015 18:00 (CET)

Country of origin

UK

Affiliation

WMUK. In 2014-15 I was Wikipedian in Residence at the Royal Society (the UK's National Academy for the Sciences), and then Cancer Research UK, Europe's largest cancer research charity.

E-mail address

johnbodkinprints.co.uk

Username

Johnbod, also Wiki CRUK John and Wiki at Royal Society John as WiR

Personal homepage or blog

Just wiki ones

Twitter username

Facebook url

Abstract

In 2014-15 I was Wikipedian in Residence at the Royal Society (the UK's National Academy for the Sciences), and then Cancer Research UK (CRUK), Europe's largest cancer research charity. Two different sets of lessons for what works and what doesn't when Wikimedia collaborates with science outside academia. I will also briefly give preliminary results from pieces of research that were done as part of the CRUK project.

Detailed proposal

In 2014-15 I was Wikipedian in Residence at the Royal Society (the UK's National Academy for the Sciences), and then Cancer Research UK (CRUK), Europe's largest cancer research charity. Two different sets of lessons for what works and what doesn't when Wikimedia collaborates with science outside academia, with some overlap.

I intend to cover on the differences in perception and attitudes between research scientists and their institutions and more conventional cultural GLAM organizations. Is it useful for us to think of science as GLAM? How do organizations that are not object-centred relate to a Wikipedian in Residence? Both projects were intended to forge permanent contacts between the existing editors in those areas on (mainly) English Wikipedia, and the expertise available in and through the organizations, and also to expand these groups. How successful were these efforts? What are the legacies of the projects in terms of the future work of the host organizations?

The CRUK project also included two pieces of research into how the general public perceives and uses medical and health information on Wikipedia. One was a qualitative study where 30 participants were asked to find out about a specific type of cancer online while their searches were watched and tracked. They were then interviewed about their search and asked why particular sites were clicked and left, and asked to rate the various sites they saw. In the other, quantitative, study a larger group were sent to read and then rate one of three pages: the "NHS Choices" patient information page, and the English Wikipedia articles before and after extensive improvements. How do their ratings compare? This will be the first look at results that are intended to be published as a paper in due course.

Track

Collaboration, or others

Length of presentation/talk

25 Minutes - or flexible

Target audience

mainly advanced level

Expected outcomes

I hope this session will give pointers for the most promising avenues of work, and what may not work so well. I'd like to stimulate debate on this area, to extend the range of future Wikipedian in Residence projects.

Will you attend GLAM-WIKI 2015 if your submission is not accepted?

Probably, and certainly if I get a scholarship

Slides or further information (optional)

Special requests

Interested attendees

If you are interested in attending this session, please sign with your username below. This will help reviewers to decide which sessions are of high interest. Sign with four tildes. (~~~~).

1. Multichill (overleg) 1 mrt 2015 11:20 (CET)
2. Sameichel (overleg) 3 mrt 2015 23:15 (CET)
3. E.Doornbusch (overleg) 16 mrt 2015 14:49 (CET)
4. Hydra Rain (overleg) 16 mrt 2015 21:26 (CET)
5. Add your username here.