Links for a talk on crowdsourcing at UCL

I'm giving a lecture on 'crowdsourcing at the British Library' for students on UCL's MSc Sustainable Heritage taking the course 'Crowd-Sourced and Citizen Data for Cultural Heritage' (BENV0114).

As some links at the British Library are still down, I've put the web archive versions into a post, along with other links included in my talk:

Crowdsourcing at the British Library*/

The Collective Wisdom Handbook: perspectives on crowdsourcing in cultural heritage

The Collective Wisdom project website

The Collective Wisdom 'Recommendations, Challenges and Opportunities for the Future of Crowdsourcing in Cultural Heritage: a White Paper' (commentable version:

Living with Machines on Zooniverse Some background:

Three prompts for ‘AI in libraries’ from SCONUL in May 2022

I’ve been meaning to write this post since May 2022, when I was invited to present at a SCONUL event on ‘AI for libraries’. It’s hard to write anything about AI that doesn’t feel outdated before you hit ‘post’, especially since ChatGPT made generative AI suddenly accessible interesting to ‘ordinary’ people. Some of the content is now practically historical but I'm posting it partly because I liked their prompts, and it's always worth thinking about how quickly some things change while others are more constant.

Prompt 1. Which library AI projects (apart from your own) have most sparked your interest over recent years?
Library of Congress 'Humans in the Loop: Accelerating access and discovery for digital collections initiative' experiments and recommendations for 'ethical, useful, and engaging' work

Understanding visitor comments at scale – sentiment analysis of TripAdvisor reviews 

Various 'machines looking through documents' research projects, including those from Living with Machines – reading maps, labelling images, disambiguating place names, looking for change over time

Prompt 2. Which three things would you advise library colleagues to consider before embarking on an AI project?

  1. Think about your people. How would AI fit into existing processes? Which jobs might it affect, and how? What information would help your audiences? Can AI actually reliably deliver it with the data you have available?
  2. AI isn't magic. Understand the fundamentals. Learn enough to understand training and testing, accuracy and sources of bias in machine learning. Try tools like
  3. Consider integration with existing systems. Where would machine-created metadata enhancements go? Is there a granularity gap between catalogue records and digitised content?

Prompt 3. What do you see as the role for information professionals in the world of AI?
Advocate for audiences
• Make the previously impossible, possible – and useful!

Advocate for ethics
• Understand the implications of vendor claims – your money is a vote for their values
• If it's creepy or wrong in person, it's creepy or wrong in an algorithm (?)

'To see a World in a Grain of Sand'
• A single digitised item can be infinitely linked to places, people, concepts – how does this change 'discovery'?

Fantastic Futures 2023 – AI4LAM in Vancouver

Reflections and selected highlights from the Fantastic Futures 2023 conference, held at the Internet Archive Canada's building in Vancouver and Simon Fraser University; full programme; videos will be coming soon.

A TL;DR is that it's incredible how many of the projects discussed wouldn't have been possible (or less feasible) a year ago. Whisper and ChatGPT (4, even more than 3.5) and many other new tools really have brought AI (machine learning) within reach. Also, the fact that I can *copy and paste text from a photo* is still astonishing. Some fantastic parts of the future are already here.

Other thinking aloud / reflections on themes from the event: the gap between experimentation and operationalisation for AI in GLAMs is still huge. Some folk are desperate to move onto operationalisation, others are enjoying the exploration phase – thinking about it, knowing where you and your organisation each stand on that could save a lot of frustration! Bridging it is possible, but it takes dedicated resources (including quality checking) from multi-disciplinary teams, and probably the goal has to be big and important enough to motivate all the work required. In examples discussed at FF2023, the scale of the backlog of collection items to be processed is that big important thing that motivates work with AI.

It didn't come up as directly, perhaps because many projects are still pilots rather than in production, but I'm very interested in the practical issues around including 'enriched' data from AI (or crowdsourcing) in GLAM collections management / cataloguing systems. We need records that can be enriched with transcriptions, keywords and other data iteratively over time, and that can record and display the provenance of that data – but can your collections systems do that?

Making LLMs stick to content in the item is hard, 'hallucinations' and loose interpretations of instructions are an issue. It's so useful hearing about things that didn't work or were hard to get right – common errors in different types of tools, etc. But who'd have thought that working with collections metadata would involve telling bedtime stories to convince LLMs to roleplay as an expert cataloguer?

Workflows are vital! So many projects have been assemblages of different machine learning / AI tools with some manual checking or correction.

A general theme in talks and chats was the temptation to lower 'quality' to be able to start to use ML/AI systems in production. People are keen to generate metadata with the imperfect tools we have now, but that runs into issues of trust for institutions expected to publish only gold standard, expert-created records. We need new conventions for displaying 'data in progress' alongside expert human records, and flexible workflows that allow for 'humans in the loop' to correct errors and biases.

If we are in an 'always already transitional' world where the work of migrating from one cataloguing standard or collections management tool to another is barely complete before it's time to move to the next format/platform, then investing in machine learning/AI tools that can reliably manage the process is worth it.

'Data ages like wine, software like fish' – but it used to take a few years for software to age, whereas now tools are outdated within a few months – how does this change how we think about 'infrastructure'? Looking ahead, people might want to re-run processes as tools improve (or break) over time, so they should be modular. Keep (and version) the data, don't expect the tool to be around forever.

Update to add: Francesco Ramigni posted on ACMI at Fantastic Futures 2023, and Emmanuelle Bermès posted Toujours plus de futurs fantastiques ! (édition 2023).

FF2023 workshops

I ran a workshop and went to two others the day before the conference proper began. I've put photos from the workshop I ran with Thomas Padilla (originally proposed with Nora McGregor and Silvia Gutiérrez De la Torre too) on Co-Creating an AI Responsive Information Literacy Curriculum workshop on Flickr. You can check out our workshop prompts and links to the 'AI literacy' curricula devised by participants.

Fantastic Futures Day 1

Thomas Mboa opens with a thought-provoking keynote. Is AI in GLAMs a Pharmakon (a purification ritual in ancient Greece where criminals were expelled)? Phamakon can mean both medicine and poison.

And discusses AI as technocoloniality e.g.Libraries in the age of technocoloniality: Epistemic alienation in African scholarly communications

Mboa asks / challenges the GLAM community:

  • Can we ensure cultural integrity alone, from our ivory tower?
  • How can we involve data-providers communities without exploiting them?
  • Al feeds on data, which in turn conveys biases. How can we ensure the quality of data?

Cultural integrity is a measure of the wholeness or intactness of material, whether it respects and honours traditional ownership, traditions and knowledge

Mboa on AI for Fair Work – avoiding digital extractivism; the need for data justice e.g.

Thomas Mboa finishes with 'Some Key actions to ensure responsible use of Al in GLAM':

  1. Develop Ethical Guidelines and Policies
  2. Address Bias and Ensure Inclusivity
  3. Enhance Privacy and Data Security
  4. Balance Al with Human Expertise
  5. Foster Digital Literacy and Skills Development
  6. Promote Sustainable and Eco-friendly Practices
  7. Encourage Collaboration and Community Engagement
  8. Monitor and Evaluate Al Impact:
  9. Intellectual Property and Copyright Considerations:
  10. Preserve Authenticity and Integrity]

I shared lessons for libraries and AI from Living with Machines then there was a shared presentation on Responsible AI and governance – transparency/notice and clear explanations; risk management; ethics/discrimination, data protection and security.

Mike Trizna (and Rebecca Dikow) on the Smithsonian's AI values statement. Why We Need an Al Values Statement – everyone at the Smithsonian involved in data collection, creation, dissemination, and/or analysis is a stakeholder – Our goal is to aspirationally and proactively strive toward shared best practices across a distributed institution. All staff should feel like their expertise matters in decisions about technology.

Jill Reilly mentioned 'archivists in the loop' and 'citizen archivists in the loop' at NARA, and Inventory of NARA Artificial Intelligence (AI) Use Cases

From Bart Murphy (and Mary Sauer Games)'s talk it seems OCLC are really doing a good job operationalising AI to deduplicate catalogue entries at scale, maintaining quality and managing cost of cloud compute; also keeping ethics in mind.

Next, William Weaver on 'Navigating AI Advancements with VoucherVision and the Specimen Label Transcription Project' – using OCR to extract text from digitised herbarium sheets (vouchers) and machine learning to parse messy OCR. More solid work on quality control! Their biggest challenge is 'hallucinations' and also LLM imprecision in following their granular rules. More on this at The Future of Natural History Transcription: Navigating AI advancements with VoucherVision and the Specimen Label Transcription Project (SLTP).

Next, Abigail Potter and Laurie Allen, Introducing the LC Labs Artificial Intelligence Planning Framework. I love that LC Labs do the hard work of documenting and sharing the material they've produced to make experimentation, innovation and implementation of AI and new technologies possible in a very large library that's also a federal body.

Abby talked about their experiments with generating catalogue data from ebooks, co-led with their cataloguing department.

A panel discussed questions like: how do you think about "right sizing" your Al activities given your organizational capacity and constraints? How do you think about balancing R&D / experimentation with applying Al to production services / operations? How can we best work with the commercial sector? With researchers? What do you think the role of LAMs should be within the Al sector and society? How can we leverage each other as cultural heritage institutions?

I liked Stu Snydman's description of organising at Harvard to address AI with their values: embrace diverse perspectives, champion access, aim for the extraordinary, seek collaboration, lead with curiosity. And Ingrid Mason's description of NFSA's question about their 'social licence' (to experiment with AI) as an 'anchoring moment'. And there are so many reading groups!

Some of the final talks brought home how much more viable ChatGPT 4 has made some tasks, and included the first of two projects trying to work around the fact that people don't provide good metadata when depositing things in research archives.

Fantastic Futures Day 2

Day 2 begins with Mike Ridley on 'The Explainability Imperative' (for AI; XAI). We need trust and accountability because machine learning is consequential. It has an impact on our lives. Why isn't explainability the default?

His explainability priorities for LAM: HCXAI; Policy and regulation; Algorithmic literacy; Critical making.

Mike quotes 'Not everything that is important lies inside the black box of AI. Critical insights can lie outside it. Why? Because that's where the human are.' Ehsan and Riedl.

Mike – explanations should be actionable and contestable. They should enable reflection, not just acquiescence.

Algorithm literacy for LAMs – embed into information literacy programmes. Use algorithms with awareness. Create algorithms with integrity.

A man presenting in a fancy old building. On a slide above, a quote and photo of a woman: "Technology designers are the new policymakers; we didn't elect them but their decisions determine the rules we live by." Latanya Sweeney Harvard University Director of the Public Interest Tech Lab

Policy and regulation for GLAMs – engage with policy and regulatory activities; insist on explainability as a core principle; promote an explanatory systems approach; champion the needs of the non-expert, lay person.

Critical making for GLAMs – build our own tools and systems; operationalise the principles of HCXAI; explore and interrogate for bias, misinformation and deception; optimise for social justice and equity

Mike quotes: "Technology designers are the new policymakers; we didn't elect them but their decisions determine the rules we live by." Latanya Sweeney (Harvard University, Director of the Public Interest Tech Lab)

Next: shorter talks on 'AI and collections management'. Jon Dunn and Emily Lynema shared work on AMP, an audiovisual metadata platform, built on for workflow management. (Someone mentioned yesterday – I'd love to know more about GLAMs experiences with these workflow tools for machine learning / AI)

Nice 'AI explorer' from Harvard Art Museums presented by Jeff Steward. It's a really nice way of seeing art through the eyes of different image tagging / labelling services like Imagga, Amazon, Clarifai, Microsoft.

(An example I found: Showing predicted tags like this is a good step towards AI literacy, and might provide an interesting basis for AI explainability as discussed earlier.)

Screenshot of a webpage with a painting of apples and the tags that different machine learning services predicted for the painting

Scott Young and Jason Clark (Montana State University) shared work on Responsible AI at Montana State University. And a nice quote from Kate Zwaard, 'Through the slow and careful adoption of tech, the library can be a leader'. They're doing 'irresponsible AI scenarios' – a bit like a project pre-mortem with a specific scenario e.g. lack of resources.

Emmanuel A. Oduagwu from the Department of Library & Information Science, Federal Polytechnic, Nigeria, calls for realistic and sustainable collaborations between developing countries – library professionals need technical skills to integrate AI tools into library service delivery; they can't work in isolation from ICT. How can other nations help?

Generative AI at JSTOR FAQ from Bryan Ryder / Beth LaPensee's talk. Their guiding principles (approximately):

  • Empowering researchers: focus on enhancing researchers' capabilities, not replacing their work
  • User-centred approach – technology that adapts to individuals, not the other way around
  • Trusted and reliable – maintain JSTOR's reputation for accurate, trustworthy information; build safeguards
  • Collaborative development – openly and transparently with the research community; value feedback
  • Continuous learning – iterate based on evidence and user input; continually refine

Michael Flierl shared a bibliography for Explainable AI (XAI).

Finally, Leo Lo and Cynthia Hudson Vitale presented draft guiding principles from the US Association of Research Libraries (ARA). Points include the need to include human review; prioritise the safety and privacy of employees and users; prioritise inclusivity; democratise access to AI and be environmentally responsible.

Finding Digital Heritage / GLAM tech / Digital Humanities jobs / staff

Technology job listings for cultural heritage or the humanities aren't always easy to find. I've recently been helping recruit into various tech roles at the British Library while also answering questions from folk looking for work in the digital heritage / GLAM (galleries, libraries, archives, museums) tech / digital humanities (DH)-ish world, so I've collated some notes on where to look for job ads. Plus, some bonus thoughts on preparing for a job search and applying for jobs.

Preparing for a job search / post

If you're looking for work, setting up alerts or subscribing to various job sites can give you a sense of what's out there, and the skills and language you'd want to include in your CV or portfolio. If you're going to advertise vacancies, it helps to get a sense of how others describe their jobs.

A photo of people in casual dress, lots of laptops, looking at a presentation 'Open Hack 2009 London'
Open Hack London, back in the day

Lurking on slacks and mailing lists gives you exposure to local jargon. Even better, if you can post occasionally to help someone with a question, as people might recognise your name later. Events – meetups, conferences, seminars, etc – can be good for meeting people and learning more about a sector. Serendipitous casual chats are easier in-person, but online events are more accessible.

Applying for GLAM/DH jobs

You probably know this, but sometimes a reminder helps… it's often worth applying for a job where you have most, but not all of the required skills. Job profiles are often wish lists rather than complete specs. That said, pay attention to the language used around different 'essential' vs 'desirable' requirements as that can save you some time. 

Please, please pay attention to the questions asked during the application process and figure out (or ask) how they're shortlisting based on the questions they ask. At the BL we can only shortlist with information that applicants provide in response to questions on the application. In other places, reflecting the language and specific requirements in the job ad and profile in your cover letter matters more. And I'm sorry if you've spent ages on it, but never assume that people can see your CV during the shortlisting or interview process.

If you see a technology or method that you haven't tried, getting familiar with it before an interview can take you a long way. Download and try it, watch videos, whatever – showing willing and being able to relate it to your stronger skills helps.

Speaking of interviews, these interview tips might help, particularly preparing potential answers using the STAR (situation, task, action, result) method.

The UK GLAM sector tends not to be able to offer visa sponsorship, but remote contracts may be possible. Always read the fine print…

Translate job descriptions and profiles to help candidates understand your vacancy

Updating to add: public organisations often have obscure job titles and descriptions. You can help translate jargon and public / charity / arts / academic sector speak into something closer to the language potential candidates might understand by writing blog posts and social media / discussion list messages that explain what the job actually involves, why it exists, and what a typical day or week might look like.

Cultural Heritage/Digital Humanities Slacks – most of these have jobs channels

GLAM/DH Mailing lists

Job sites with GLAM/DH vacancies

Toddlers to teenagers: AI and libraries in 2023

A copy of my April 2023 position paper for the Collections as Data: State of the field and future directions summit held at the Internet Archive in Vancouver in April 2023. The full set of statements is available on Zenodo at Position Statements -> Collections as Data: State of the field and future directions. It'll be interesting to see how this post ages. I have a new favourite metaphor since I wrote this – the 'brilliant, hard-working — and occasionally hungover — [medical] intern'.

A light brown historical building with columns and steps. The building is small but grand. A modern skyscraper looms in the background.
The Internet Archive building in Vancouver

My favourite analogy for AI / machine learning-based tools[1] is that they’re like working with a child. They can spin a great story, but you wouldn’t bet your job on it being accurate. They can do tasks like sorting and labelling images, but as they absorb models of the world from the adults around them you’d want to check that they haven’t mistakenly learnt things like ‘nurses are women and doctors are men’.

Libraries and other GLAMs have been working with machine learning-based tools for a number of years, cumulatively gathering evidence for what works, what doesn’t, and what it might mean for our work. AI can scale up tasks like transcription, translation, classification, entity recognition and summarisation quickly – but it shouldn’t be used without supervision if the answer to the question ‘does it matter if the output is true?’ is ‘yes’.[2] Training a model and checking the results of an external model both require resources and expertise that may be scarce in GLAMs.

But the thing about toddlers is that they’re cute and fun to play with. By the start of 2023, ‘generative AI’ tools like the text-to-image tool DALL·E 2 and large language models (LLMs) like ChatGPT captured the public imagination. You’ve probably heard examples of people using LLMs as everything from an oracle (‘give me arguments for and against remodelling our kitchen’) to a tutor (‘explain this concept to me’) to a creative spark for getting started with writing code or a piece of text. If you don’t have an AI strategy already, you’re going to need one soon.

The other thing about toddlers is that they grow up fast. GLAMs have an opportunity to help influence the types of teenagers then adults they become – but we need to be proactive if we want AI that produces trustworthy results and doesn’t create further biases. Improving AI literacy within the GLAM sector is an important part of being able to make good choices about the technologies we give our money and attention to. (The same is also true for our societies as a whole, of course).

Since the 2017 summit, I’ve found myself thinking about ‘collections as data’ in two ways.[3] One is the digitised collections records (from metadata through to full page or object scans) that we share with researchers interested in studying particular topics, formats or methods; the other is the data that GLAMs themselves could generate about their collections to make them more discoverable and better connected to other collections. The development of specialist methods within computer vision and natural language processing has promise for both sorts of ‘collections as data’,[4] but we still have much to learn about the logistical, legal, cultural and training challenges in aligning the needs of researchers and GLAMs.

The buzz around AI and the hunger for more material to feed into models has introduced a third – collections as training data. Libraries hold vast repositories of historical and contemporary collections that reflect both the best thinking and the worst biases of the society that produced them. What is their role in responsibly and ethically stewarding those collections into training data (or not)?

As we learn more about the different ‘modes of interaction’ with AI-based tools, from the ‘text-grounded’, ‘knowledge-seeking’ and ‘creative’,[5] and collect examples of researchers and institutions using tools like large language models to create structured data from text,[6] we’re better able to understand and advocate for the role that AI might play in library work. Through collaborations within the Living with Machines project, I’ve seen how we could combine crowdsourcing and machine learning to clear copyright for orphan works at scale; improve metadata and full text searches with word vectors that help people match keywords to concepts rather than literal strings; disambiguate historical place names and turn symbols on maps into computational information.

Our challenge now is to work together with the Silicon Valley companies that shape so much of what AI ‘knows’ about the world, with the communities and individuals that created the collections we care for, and with the wider GLAM sector to ensure that we get the best AI tools possible.

[1] I’m going to use ‘AI’ as a shorthand for ‘AI and machine learning’ throughout, as machine learning models are the most practical applications of AI-type technologies at present. I’m excluding ‘artificial general intelligence’ for now.

[2] Tiulkanov, “Is It Safe to Use ChatGPT for Your Task?”

[3] Much of this thinking is informed by the Living with Machines project, a mere twinkle in the eye during the first summit. Launched in late 2018, the project aims to devise new methods, tools and software in data science and artificial intelligence that can be applied to historical resources. A key goal for the Library was to understand and develop some solutions for the practical, intellectual, logistical and copyright challenges in collaborative research with digitised collections at scale. As the project draws to an end five and a half years later, I’ve been reflecting on lessons learnt from our work with AI, and on the dramatic improvements in machine learning tools and methods since the project began.

[4] See for example Living with Machines work with data science and digital humanities methods documented at

[5] Goldberg, “Reinforcement Learning for Language Models.” April 2023.

[6] For example, tools like Annif, and the work of librarian/developers like Matt Miller and genealogists.

Little, “AI Genealogy Use Cases, How-to Guides.” 2023.

Miller, “Using GPT on Library Collections.” March 30, 2023.

Is 'clicks to curiosity triggered' a good metric for GLAM collections online?

The National Archives UK have a 'new way to explore the nation’s archives' and it's lovely:

It features highlights from their collections and 'stories behind our records'. The front page offers options to explore by topic (based on the types of records that TNA holds) and time period. It also has direct links to individual stories, with carefully selected images and preview text. Three clicks in and I was marvelling at a 1904 photo from a cotton mill, and connecting it to other knowledge.

When you click into a story about an individual record, there's a 'Why this record matters' heading, which reminds me of the Australian model for a simple explanation of the 'significance' of a collection item. Things get a bit more traditional 'catalogue record online' when you click through to the 'record details' but overall it's an effective path that helps you understand what's in their collections.

The simplicity of getting to an interesting items has made me wonder about a new UX metric for collections online – 'time to curiosity inspired', or more accurately 'clicks to curiosity triggered'. 'Clicks to specific item' is probably a more common metric for catalogue-based searches, but this is a different type of invitation to explore a collection via loosely themed stories.

'About' post and others under the 'Project ETNA' tag.

Screenshot of the Explore website, with colourful pictures next to headings like 'explore by topic', 'explore by time period' and 'registered design for an expanding travelling basket'

Live-blog from MCG's Museums+Tech 2022

The Museums Computer Group's annual conference has been an annual highlight for some years now, and in 2022 I donned my mask and went to their in-person event. And only a few months later I'm posting this lightly edited version of my Mastodon posts from the day of the event in November 2022… Notes in brackets are generally from the original toots/posts.

This was the first event that I live-blogged on Mastodon rather than live-tweeting. I definitely missed the to-and-fro of conversation around a hashtag, as in mid-November Mastodon was a lot quieter than it is even a few weeks later. Anyway, on with the post!

I'm at the Museums Computer Group's #MuseTech2022 conference.

Here's the programme

Huuuuuuge thanks to the volunteers who worked so hard on the event – and as Chair Dafydd James says, who've put extra work into making this a hybrid event

Keynote Kati Price on the last two and a half years – a big group hug or primal scream might help!

She's looking at the consequences of the pandemic and lockdowns in terms of: collaboration, content, cash, churn

Widespread adoption of tools as people found new ways of collaborating from home

Content – the 'hosepipe of requests' for digital content is all too familiar. Lockdown reduced things to one unifying goal – to engage audiences online

(In hindsight, that moment of 'we must find / provide entertainment online' was odd – the world was already full of books, tv, podcasts, videos etc – did we want things we could do together that were a bit like things we'd do IRL?)

V&A moved to capture their Kimono exhibition to share online just before closing for lockdown. Got a Time Out 'Time In'. No fancy tech, just good storytelling

Took a data-informed approach to creating content e.g. ASMR videos. Shows the benefits of 'format thinking'. Recommends #MuseTech2022

V&A found that people either wanted very short or long form content; some wanted informative, others light-hearted content

Cash – how do you keep creating great experiences when income drops? No visitors, no income.

Churn – 'the great resignation' – we've seen a brain drain in the #MuseTech / GLAM sector, especially as it's hard to attract people given salaries. Not only in tech – loss of expert collections, research staff who help inform online content

UK's heading into recession, so more cuts are probably coming. What should a digital team look like in this new era?

Also, we're all burnt out. (Holler!) Emotional reserves are at an all-time low.

(Thinking about the silos – I feel my work-social circles are dwindling as I don't run into people around the building now most people are WFH most of the time)

Back from the break at #MuseTech2022 for more #MuseTech goodness, starting with Seb Chan and Indigo Holcombe-James on ACMI's CEO Digital Mentoring Program – could you pair different kinds of organisations and increase the digital literacy of senior leaders?

Working with a mentor had tangible and intangible benefits (in addition to making time for learning and reflection). The next phase was shorter, with fewer people. (Context for non-Australians – Melbourne's lockdown was *very* long and very restrictive)

(I wonder what a 'minimum viable mentorship' model might be – does a long coffee with someone count? I've certainly had my brain picked that way by senior leaders interested in digital participation and strategy)

Lessons – cross-art form conversations work really well; everyone is facing similar challenges

(Side note – I'm liking that longer posts mean I'm not dashing off posts to keep up with the talks)

Next up #MuseTech2022 Stephanie Bertrand on prestige and aesthetic judgement in the art world. Can you recruit the public's collective intelligence to discover artworks? But can you remove the influence of official 'art world' taste makers in judging artworks?

'Social feedback is a catch-22' – can have runaway inequality where popular content becomes more popular, and artificial manipulation that skews what's valued?

Now Somaya Langley on making digital preservation an everyday thing. (Shoutout to the awesome #DigiPres folk who do this hard work) – how can a whole organisation include digital preservation in its wider thinking about collections and corporate records? What about collecting born-digital content so prevalent in modern life?

(Side note – Australia seems to have a much stronger record management culture within GLAMs than in the UK, where IME you really have to search to find organisational expectations about archiving project records)

#MuseTech2022 Somaya's lessons learnt include: use the three-legged stool of digital preservation of technology, resources and organisation – approach it holistically

Help colleagues learn by doing

Moving from Projects to Programmes to Business as Usual is hard

Help people be comfortable with there not being one right answer, and ok with 'it depends'

#MuseTech2022 Next up in Session 2: Collections; Craig Middleton, Caroline Wilson-Barnao, Lisa Enright – documenting intense bushfires in Aus summer 2019/20 and COVID. They used Facebook as a short-term response to the crisis; planned a physical exhibition but a website came to seem more appropriate as COVID went on. has over 300 unique responses. FB helpful for seeing if a collecting idea works while it's timely, but other platforms better for sustained engagement. Also need to think about comfort levels about sharing content changing as time goes on.

Museums can be places to have difficult conversations, to help people make sense of crises. But museums also need to think beyond physical spaces and include digital from the start.

Also hard when museum people are going through the same crises (links back to Kati's keynote about what we lived through as a sector working for our audiences while living through the pando ourselves)

#MuseTech2022 David Weinczok 'using digital media to go local'

60% of National Museums Scotland's online audiences have never visited their museums. 'Telling the story of an object without the context of the landscape and community it came from' can help link online and in-person audiences and experiences

'Museum Screen Time' – experts react to pop culture depictions of their subject area eg Viking culture

Blog series 'Objects in Place' – found items in collections from a particular area, looked to tell stories with objects as 'connective threads', not the focus in themselves

'What can we do online to make connections with people and communities offline?'

(So many speakers are finishing with questions – I love this! Way to make the most of being in conversation with the musetech community here)

Next at #MuseTech2022, Amy Adams & Karen Clarke, National Museum of the Royal Navy – digital was always lower priority before COVID; managed to do lots of work on collections data during lockdowns.

They finally got a digital asset management (DAM) system, but then had to think about maintaining it; explaining why implementation takes time. Then there was an expectation that they could 'flip a switch' and put all the collections online. Finding ways to have positive conversations with folk who are still learning about the #MuseTech field.

Also doing work on 'addressing empires' – I like that framing for a very British institution.

Now Rebecca Odell, Niti Acharya, Hackney Museum on surviving a cyber attack. Lost access to collections management database (CMS) and images. Like their digital building had burnt down. Stakeholder and public expectations did not adjust accordingly! 14 months without a CMS.

Know where your backups are! Export DBs as CSV, store it externally. LOCKSS, hard drives

#MuseTech2022 Rebecca Odell, Niti Acharya, Hackney Museum continued – reconstructing your digital stuff from backups, exports, etc takes tiiiiiiime and lots of manual work. The sector needs guides, checklists, templates to help orgs prepare for cyber attacks.

(Lots of her advice also applies to your own personal digital media, of course. Back up your backups and put them lots of places. Leave a hard drive at work, swap one with a friend!)

New Q&A game – track the echo between remote speakers and the AV system in the back. Who's unmuted that should be muted? [One of the joys of a hybrid conference]

We'll be heading out to lunch soon, including the MCG annual general meeting


(Missed a few talks post-lunch)

Adam Coulson (National Museums Scotland) on QR codes:
* weren't scanned in all exhibition/gallery contexts
* use them to add extra layers, not core content
* don't assume everyone will scan
* discourage FOMO (explain what's there)
* consider precious battery life

More at

Now Sian Shaw (Westminster Abbey) on no longer printing 12,000 sheets of paper a week (given out to visitors with that day's info). Made each order of service (dunno, church stuff, I am a heathen) at the same URL with templates to drop in commonly used content like hymns

It's a web page, not an app – more flexible, better affordances re your place on the page

Some loved the move to sustainability but others don't like having phones out in church.

Ultimately, be led by the problem you're trying to solve (and there's always a paper backup for no/dead phone folk)

Q&A discussion – take small steps, build on lessons learnt

#MuseTech2022 Onto the final panel, 'Funding digital – what two years worth of data tells us'

(It's funny when you have an insight into your own #MuseTech2022
life via a remark at a conference – the first ever museum team I worked in was 'Outreach' at Melbourne Museum, which combined my digital team with the learning team under the one director. I've always known that working in Outreach shaped my world view, but did sitting next to the learning team also shape it?)

And now Daf James is finishing with thanks for the committee members behind the MCG generally and the event in particular – big up @irny for keeping the tech going in difficult circumstances!

Daf James welcomes online and in-person attendees to the Museums Computer Group's Museums+Tech 2022 conference

National approaches to crowdsourcing / citizen science?

This is a 'work in progress' post that I hope to add to as I gather information about national portals for crowdsourcing / citizen science / citizen history and other forms of voluntary digital / online participation.

While portals like SciStarter, Crowds4U and platforms like Zooniverse, FromThePage, HistoryPin etc are a great way to search across projects for something that matches your interests, I'm interested in the growth of national portals or indexes to projects (they might also be called 'project finders'). It's not so much the sites themselves that interest me as the underlying networks of regional communities of practice, national or regional infrastructure and other signs of national support that they might variously reflect or help create. If you're interested in specific projects outside the UK-US/English-language bubble, check out Crowdsourcing the world's heritage. I've also shared a 2015 list of 'participatory digital heritage sites' that includes many crowdsourcing sites.

If you know of a national portal or umbrella organisation for crowdsourcing, please drop me a line! Last updated: Feb 7, 2023.


Jan Smeddinck emailed to share the LBG Open Innovation in Science Center


Lesandro Ponciano nominated 'Civis, which is the Brazilian Citizen Science platform. The link is Civis was built by using the same software developed by Ibercivis in Spain for the platform. Civis was launched in 2022 – the event (in Portuguese) is recorded on YouTube at '


The Canadian Citizen Science portal


This post was inspired by the apparently coordinated approach in France. The Archives nationales participatives site has 'Projets collaboratifs de transcriptions, annotations et indexations' – that is, participatory national archives with collaborative transcription, annotation and indexing projects.

They also have Le réseau Particip-Arc, a 'network of actors committed to participatory science in the fields of culture', supported by the Ministry of Culture and coordinated by the National Museum of Natural History.

European Union is a 'platform for sharing citizen science projects, resources, tools, training and much more'.

Germany / German-language projects

The German / German-language citizen science portal


Alastair Dunning pointed to the Citizen Science network, run by @CitSciLab (Margaret Gold).


Agata Bochynska said, 'Norway has recently formed a national network for citizen science that’s coordinated by Research Council of Norway' – Nasjonalt nettverk for folkeforskning (folkeforskning translates as 'folk research' according to Google).


The Scottish Citizen Science portal

Slovenia lists current and completed citizen science projects in Slovenia, infrastructure available to support projects, and events and other activities. Hat tip Mitja V. Iskrić on mastodon.


David Haskiya reports: ' Provides an intro to citizen science, a catalogue of Swedish projects, etc. Seems to be part of an EU-network of such sites. Summary in English here'

A Swedish national hub for everyone interested in citizen science (medborgarforskning). The project was funded by Vinnova – Sweden’s innovation agency, the University of Gothenburg, the Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences, Umeå University.

United Kingdom lists some volunteering portals but they don't make it easy to find online-only opportunities.

United Nations lists online and on-site (i.e. in-person) opportunities around the world, although some of them might stretch the definition of 'voluntary roles'.


Rita Singer reports: 'In Wales, we have the People's Collection, which functions as a citizen archive of Wales' history and heritage.'

Introducing… The Collective Wisdom Handbook

I'm delighted to share my latest publication, a collaboration with 15 co-authors written in March and April 2021. It's the major output of my Collective Wisdom project, an AHRC-funded project I lead with Meghan Ferriter and Sam Blickhan.

Until August 9, 2021, you can provide feedback or comment on The Collective Wisdom Handbook: perspectives on crowdsourcing in cultural heritage:

We have published this first version of our collaborative text to provide early access to our work, and to invite comment and discussion from anyone interested in crowdsourcing, citizen science, citizen history, digital / online volunteer projects, programmes, tools or platforms with cultural heritage collections.

I wrote two posts to provide further context:

Our book is now open for 'community review'. What does that mean for you?

Announcing an 'early access' version of our Collective Wisdom Handbook

I'm curious to see how much of a difference this period of open comment makes. The comments so far have been quite specific and useful, but I'd like to know where we *really* got it right, and where we could include other examples. You need a pubpub account to comment but after that it's pretty straightforward – select text, and add a comment, or comment on an entire chapter.

Having some distance from the original writing period has been useful for me – not least, the realisation that the title should have been 'perspectives on crowdsourcing in cultural heritage and digital humanities'.

About 'a practical guide to crowdsourcing in cultural heritage'

book cover

Some time ago I wrote a chapter on 'Crowdsourcing in cultural heritage: a practical guide to designing and running successful projects' for the Routledge International Handbook of Research Methods in Digital Humanities, edited by Kristen Schuster and Stuart Dunn. As their blurb says, the volume 'draws on both traditional and emerging fields of study to consider what a grounded definition of quantitative and qualitative research in the Digital Humanities (DH) might mean; which areas DH can fruitfully draw on in order to foster and develop that understanding; where we can see those methods applied; and what the future directions of research methods in Digital Humanities might look like'.

Inspired by a post from the authors of a chapter in the same volume (Opening the ‘black box’ of digital cultural heritage processes: feminist digital humanities and critical heritage studies by Hannah Smyth, Julianne Nyhan & Andrew Flinn), I'm sharing something about what I wanted to do in my chapter.

As the title suggests, I wanted to provide practical insights for cultural heritage and digital humanities practitioners. Writing for a Handbook of Research Methods in Digital Humanities was an opportunity help researchers understand both how to apply the 'method' and how the 'behind the scenes' work affects the outcomes. As a method, crowdsourcing in cultural heritage touches on many more methods and disciplines. The chapter built on my doctoral research, and my ideas were roadtested at many workshops, classes and conferences.

Rather than crib from my introduction (which you can read in a pre-edited version online), I've included the headings from the chapter as a guide to the contents:

  • An introduction to crowdsourcing in cultural heritage
  • Key conceptual and research frameworks
  • Fundamental concepts in cultural heritage crowdsourcing
  • Why do cultural heritage institutions support crowdsourcing projects?
  • Why do people contribute to crowdsourcing projects?
  • Turning crowdsourcing ideas into reality
  • Planning crowdsourcing projects
  • Defining 'success' for your project
  • Managing organisational impact
  • Choosing source collections
  • Planning workflows and data re-use
  • Planning communications and participant recruitment
  • Final considerations: practical and ethical ‘reality checks’
  • Developing and testing crowdsourcing projects
  • Designing the ‘onboarding’ experience
  • Task design
  • Documentation and tutorials
  • Quality control: validation and verification systems
  • Rewards and recognition
  • Running crowdsourcing projects
  • Launching a project
  • The role of participant discussion
  • Ongoing community engagement
  • Planning a graceful exit
  • The future of crowdsourcing in cultural heritage
  • Thanks and acknowledgements

I wrote in the open on this Google Doc: 'Crowdsourcing in cultural heritage: a practical guide to designing and running successful projects', and benefited from the feedback I got during that process, so this post is also an opportunity to highlight and reiterate my 'Thanks and acknowledgements' section:

I would like to thank participants and supporters of crowdsourcing projects I’ve created, including Museum Metadata Games, In their own words: collecting experiences of the First World War, and In the Spotlight. I would also like to thank my co-organisers and attendees at the Digital Humanities 2016 Expert Workshop on the future of crowdsourcing. Especial thanks to the participants in courses and workshops on ‘crowdsourcing in cultural heritage’, including the British Library’s Digital Scholarship training programme, the HILT Digital Humanities summer school (once with Ben Brumfield) and scholars at other events where the course was held, whose insights, cynicism and questions have informed my thinking over the years. Finally, thanks to Meghan Ferriter and Victoria Van Hyning for their comments on this manuscript.

References for Crowdsourcing in cultural heritage: a practical guide to designing and running successful projects

Alam, S. L., & Campbell, J. (2017). Temporal Motivations of Volunteers to Participate in Cultural Crowdsourcing Work. Information Systems Research.

Bedford, A. (2014, February 16). Instructional Overlays and Coach Marks for Mobile Apps. Retrieved 12 September 2014, from Nielsen Norman Group website:

Berglund Prytz, Y. (2013, June 24). The Oxford Community Collection Model. Retrieved 22 October 2018, from RunCoCo website:

Bernstein, S. (2014). Crowdsourcing in Brooklyn. In M. Ridge (Ed.), Crowdsourcing Our Cultural Heritage. Retrieved from

Bitgood, S. (2010). An attention-value model of museum visitors (pp. 1–29). Retrieved from Center for the Advancement of Informal Science Education website:

Bonney, R., Ballard, H., Jordan, R., McCallie, E., Phillips, T., Shirk, J., & Wilderman, C. C. (2009). Public Participation in Scientific Research: Defining the Field and Assessing Its Potential for Informal Science Education. A CAISE Inquiry Group Report (pp. 1–58). Retrieved from Center for Advancement of Informal Science Education (CAISE) website:

Brohan, P. (2012, July 23). One million, six hundred thousand new observations. Retrieved 30 October 2012, from Old Weather Blog website:

Brohan, P. (2014, August 18). In search of lost weather. Retrieved 5 September 2014, from Old Weather Blog website:

Brumfield, B. W. (2012a, March 5). Quality Control for Crowdsourced Transcription. Retrieved 9 October 2013, from Collaborative Manuscript Transcription website:

Brumfield, B. W. (2012b, March 17). Crowdsourcing at IMLS WebWise 2012. Retrieved 8 September 2014, from Collaborative Manuscript Transcription website:

Budiu, R. (2014, March 2). Login Walls Stop Users in Their Tracks. Retrieved 7 March 2014, from Nielsen Norman Group website:

Causer, T., & Terras, M. (2014). ‘Many Hands Make Light Work. Many Hands Together Make Merry Work’: Transcribe Bentham and Crowdsourcing Manuscript Collections. In M. Ridge (Ed.), Crowdsourcing Our Cultural Heritage. Retrieved from

Causer, T., & Wallace, V. (2012). Building A Volunteer Community: Results and Findings from Transcribe Bentham. Digital Humanities Quarterly, 6(2). Retrieved from

Cheng, J., Teevan, J., Iqbal, S. T., & Bernstein, M. S. (2015, April). Break It Down: A Comparison of Macro- and Microtasks. 4061–4064.

Clary, E. G., Snyder, M., Ridge, R. D., Copeland, J., Stukas, A. A., Haugen, J., & Miene, P. (1998). Understanding and assessing the motivations of volunteers: A functional approach. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 74(6), 1516–30.

Collings, R. (2014, May 5). The art of computer image recognition. Retrieved 25 May 2014, from The Public Catalogue Foundation website:

Collings, R. (2015, February 1). The art of computer recognition. Retrieved 22 October 2018, from Art UK website:

Crowdsourcing Consortium. (2015). Engaging the Public: Best Practices for Crowdsourcing Across the Disciplines. Retrieved from

Crowley, E. J., & Zisserman, A. (2016). The Art of Detection. Presented at the Workshop on Computer Vision for Art Analysis, ECCV. Retrieved from

Csikszentmihalyi, M., & Hermanson, K. (1995). Intrinsic Motivation in Museums: Why Does One Want to Learn? In J. Falk & L. D. Dierking (Eds.), Public institutions for personal learning: Establishing a research agenda (pp. 66–77). Washington D.C.: American Association of Museums.

Dafis, L. L., Hughes, L. M., & James, R. (2014). What’s Welsh for ‘Crowdsourcing’? Citizen Science and Community Engagement at the National Library of Wales. In M. Ridge (Ed.), Crowdsourcing Our Cultural Heritage. Retrieved from

Das Gupta, V., Rooney, N., & Schreibman, S. (n.d.). Notes from the Transcription Desk: Modes of engagement between the community and the resource of the Letters of 1916. Digital Humanities 2016: Conference Abstracts. Presented at the Digital Humanities 2016, Kraków. Retrieved from

De Benetti, T. (2011, June 16). The secrets of Digitalkoot: Lessons learned crowdsourcing data entry to 50,000 people (for free). Retrieved 9 January 2012, from Microtask website:

de Boer, V., Hildebrand, M., Aroyo, L., De Leenheer, P., Dijkshoorn, C., Tesfa, B., & Schreiber, G. (2012). Nichesourcing: Harnessing the power of crowds of experts. Proceedings of the 18th International Conference on Knowledge Engineering and Knowledge Management, EKAW 2012, 16–20. Retrieved from

DH2016 Expert Workshop. (2016, July 12). DH2016 Crowdsourcing workshop session overview. Retrieved 5 October 2018, from DH2016 Expert Workshop: Beyond The Basics: What Next For Crowdsourcing? website:

Dillon-Scott, P. (2011, March 31). How Europeana, crowdsourcing & wiki principles are preserving European history. Retrieved 15 February 2015, from The Sociable website:

DiMeo, M. (2014, February 3). First Monday Library Chat: University of Iowa’s DIY History. Retrieved 7 September 2014, from The Recipes Project website:

Dunn, S., & Hedges, M. (2012). Crowd-Sourcing Scoping Study: Engaging the Crowd with Humanities Research (p. 56). Retrieved from King’s College website:

Dunn, S., & Hedges, M. (2013). Crowd-sourcing as a Component of Humanities Research Infrastructures. International Journal of Humanities and Arts Computing, 7(1–2), 147–169.

Durkin, P. (2017, September 28). Release notes: A big antedating for white lie – and introducing Shakespeare’s world. Retrieved 29 September 2017, from Oxford English Dictionary website:

Eccles, K., & Greg, A. (2014). Your Paintings Tagger: Crowdsourcing Descriptive Metadata for a National Virtual Collection. In M. Ridge (Ed.), Crowdsourcing Our Cultural Heritage. Retrieved from

Edwards, D., & Graham, M. (2006). Museum volunteers and heritage sectors. Australian Journal on Volunteering, 11(1), 19–27.

European Citizen Science Association. (2015). 10 Principles of Citizen Science. Retrieved from

Eveleigh, A., Jennett, C., Blandford, A., Brohan, P., & Cox, A. L. (2014). Designing for dabblers and deterring drop-outs in citizen science. 2985–2994.

Eveleigh, A., Jennett, C., Lynn, S., & Cox, A. L. (2013). I want to be a captain! I want to be a captain!: Gamification in the old weather citizen science project. Proceedings of the First International Conference on Gameful Design, Research, and Applications, 79–82. Retrieved from

Ferriter, M., Rosenfeld, C., Boomer, D., Burgess, C., Leachman, S., Leachman, V., … Shuler, M. E. (2016). We learn together: Crowdsourcing as practice and method in the Smithsonian Transcription Center. Collections, 12(2), 207–225.

Fleet, C., Kowal, K., & Přidal, P. (2012). Georeferencer: Crowdsourced Georeferencing for Map Library Collections. D-Lib Magazine, 18(11/12).

Forum posters. (2010, present). Signs of OW addiction … Retrieved 11 April 2014, from Old Weather Forum » Shore Leave » Dockside Cafe website:

Fugelstad, P., Dwyer, P., Filson Moses, J., Kim, J. S., Mannino, C. A., Terveen, L., & Snyder, M. (2012). What Makes Users Rate (Share, Tag, Edit…)? Predicting Patterns of Participation in Online Communities. Proceedings of the ACM 2012 Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work, 969–978. Retrieved from

Gilliver, P. (2012, October 4). ‘Your dictionary needs you’: A brief history of the OED’s appeals to the public. Retrieved from Oxford English Dictionary website:

Goldstein, D. (1994). ‘Yours for Science’: The Smithsonian Institution’s Correspondents and the Shape of Scientific Community in Nineteenth-Century America. Isis, 85(4), 573–599.

Grayson, R. (2016). A Life in the Trenches? The Use of Operation War Diary and Crowdsourcing Methods to Provide an Understanding of the British Army’s Day-to-Day Life on the Western Front. British Journal for Military History, 2(2). Retrieved from

Hess, W. (2010, February 16). Onboarding: Designing Welcoming First Experiences. Retrieved 29 July 2014, from UX Magazine website:

Holley, R. (2009). Many Hands Make Light Work: Public Collaborative OCR Text Correction in Australian Historic Newspapers (No. March). Canberra: National Library of Australia.

Holley, R. (2010). Crowdsourcing: How and Why Should Libraries Do It? D-Lib Magazine, 16(3/4).

Holmes, K. (2003). Volunteers in the heritage sector: A neglected audience? International Journal of Heritage Studies, 9(4), 341–355.

Kittur, A., Nickerson, J. V., Bernstein, M., Gerber, E., Shaw, A., Zimmerman, J., … Horton, J. (2013). The future of crowd work. Proceedings of the 2013 Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work, 1301–1318. Retrieved from

Lambert, S., Winter, M., & Blume, P. (2014, March 26). Getting to where we are now. Retrieved 4 March 2015, from website:

Lascarides, M., & Vershbow, B. (2014). What’s on the menu?: Crowdsourcing at the New York Public Library. In M. Ridge (Ed.), Crowdsourcing Our Cultural Heritage. Retrieved from

Latimer, J. (2009, February 25). Letter in the Attic: Lessons learnt from the project. Retrieved 17 April 2014, from My Brighton and Hove website:

Lazy Registration design pattern. (n.d.). Retrieved 9 December 2018, from Http:// website:

Leon, S. M. (2014). Build, Analyse and Generalise: Community Transcription of the Papers of the War Department and the Development of Scripto. In M. Ridge (Ed.), Crowdsourcing Our Cultural Heritage. Retrieved from

Mayer, R. E., & Moreno, R. (2003). Nine ways to reduce cognitive load in multimedia learning. Educational Psychologist, 38(1), 43–52.

McGonigal, J. (n.d.). Gaming the Future of Museums. Retrieved from

Mills, E. (2017, December). The Flitch of Bacon: An Unexpected Journey Through the Collections of the British Library. Retrieved 17 August 2018, from British Library Digital Scholarship blog website:

Mitra, T., & Gilbert, E. (2014). The Language that Gets People to Give: Phrases that Predict Success on Kickstarter. Retrieved from

Mugar, G., Østerlund, C., Hassman, K. D., Crowston, K., & Jackson, C. B. (2014). Planet Hunters and Seafloor Explorers: Legitimate Peripheral Participation Through Practice Proxies in Online Citizen Science. Retrieved from

Mugar, G., Østerlund, C., Jackson, C. B., & Crowston, K. (2015). Being Present in Online Communities: Learning in Citizen Science. Proceedings of the 7th International Conference on Communities and Technologies, 129–138.

Museums, Libraries and Archives Council. (2008). Generic Learning Outcomes. Retrieved 8 September 2014, from Inspiring Learning website:

National Archives of Australia. (n.d.). ArcHIVE – homepage. Retrieved 18 June 2014, from ArcHIVE website:

Nielsen, J. (1995). 10 Usability Heuristics for User Interface Design. Retrieved 29 April 2014, from

Nov, O., Arazy, O., & Anderson, D. (2011). Technology-Mediated Citizen Science Participation: A Motivational Model. Proceedings of the AAAI International Conference on Weblogs and Social Media. Presented at the Barcelona, Spain. Barcelona, Spain.

Oomen, J., Gligorov, R., & Hildebrand, M. (2014). Waisda?: Making Videos Findable through Crowdsourced Annotations. In M. Ridge (Ed.), Crowdsourcing Our Cultural Heritage. Retrieved from

Paas, F., Renkl, A., & Sweller, J. (2003). Cognitive Load Theory and Instructional Design: Recent Developments. Educational Psychologist, 38(1), 1–4.

Part I: Building a Great Project. (n.d.). Retrieved 9 December 2018, from Zooniverse Help website:

Preist, C., Massung, E., & Coyle, D. (2014). Competing or aiming to be average?: Normification as a means of engaging digital volunteers. Proceedings of the 17th ACM Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work & Social Computing, 1222–1233.

Raddick, M. J., Bracey, G., Gay, P. L., Lintott, C. J., Murray, P., Schawinski, K., … Vandenberg, J. (2010). Galaxy Zoo: Exploring the Motivations of Citizen Science Volunteers. Astronomy Education Review, 9(1), 18.

Raimond, Y., Smethurst, M., & Ferne, T. (2014, September 15). What we learnt by crowdsourcing the World Service archive. Retrieved 15 September 2014, from BBC R&D website:

Reside, D. (2014). Crowdsourcing Performing Arts History with NYPL’s ENSEMBLE. Presented at the Digital Humanities 2014. Retrieved from

Ridge, M. (2011a). Playing with Difficult Objects – Game Designs to Improve Museum Collections. In J. Trant & D. Bearman (Eds.), Museums and the Web 2011: Proceedings. Retrieved from

Ridge, M. (2011b). Playing with difficult objects: Game designs for crowdsourcing museum metadata (MSc Dissertation, City University London). Retrieved from

Ridge, M. (2013). From Tagging to Theorizing: Deepening Engagement with Cultural Heritage through Crowdsourcing. Curator: The Museum Journal, 56(4).

Ridge, M. (2014, November). Citizen History and its discontents. Presented at the IHR Digital History Seminar, Institute for Historical Research, London. Retrieved from

Ridge, M. (2015). Making digital history: The impact of digitality on public participation and scholarly practices in historical research (Ph.D., Open University). Retrieved from

Ridge, M. (2018). British Library Digital Scholarship course 105: Exercises for Crowdsourcing in Libraries, Museums and Cultural Heritage Institutions. Retrieved from

Rotman, D., Preece, J., Hammock, J., Procita, K., Hansen, D., Parr, C., … Jacobs, D. (2012). Dynamic changes in motivation in collaborative citizen-science projects. Proceedings of the ACM 2012 Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work, 217–226.

Sample Ward, A. (2011, May 18). Crowdsourcing vs Community-sourcing: What’s the difference and the opportunity? Retrieved 6 January 2013, from Amy Sample Ward’s Version of NPTech website:

Schmitt, J. R., Wang, J., Fischer, D. A., Jek, K. J., Moriarty, J. C., Boyajian, T. S., … Socolovsky, M. (2014). Planet Hunters. VI. An Independent Characterization of KOI-351 and Several Long Period Planet Candidates from the Kepler Archival Data. The Astronomical Journal, 148(2), 28.

Secord, A. (1994). Corresponding interests: Artisans and gentlemen in nineteenth-century natural history. The British Journal for the History of Science, 27(04), 383–408.

Shakespeare’s World Talk #OED. (Ongoing). Retrieved 21 April 2019, from

Sharma, P., & Hannafin, M. J. (2007). Scaffolding in technology-enhanced learning environments. Interactive Learning Environments, 15(1), 27–46.

Shirky, C. (2011). Cognitive surplus: Creativity and generosity in a connected age. London, U.K.: Penguin.

Silvertown, J. (2009). A new dawn for citizen science. Trends in Ecology & Evolution, 24(9), 467–71.

Simmons, B. (2015, August 24). Measuring Success in Citizen Science Projects, Part 2: Results. Retrieved 28 August 2015, from Zooniverse website:

Simon, N. K. (2010). The Participatory Museum. Retrieved from

Smart, P. R., Simperl, E., & Shadbolt, N. (2014). A Taxonomic Framework for Social Machines. In D. Miorandi, V. Maltese, M. Rovatsos, A. Nijholt, & J. Stewart (Eds.), Social Collective Intelligence: Combining the Powers of Humans and Machines to Build a Smarter Society. Retrieved from

Smithsonian Institution Archives. (2012, March 21). Meteorology. Retrieved 25 November 2017, from Smithsonian Institution Archives website:

Springer, M., Dulabahn, B., Michel, P., Natanson, B., Reser, D., Woodward, D., & Zinkham, H. (2008). For the Common Good: The Library of Congress Flickr Pilot Project (pp. 1–55). Retrieved from Library of Congress website:

Stebbins, R. A. (1997). Casual leisure: A conceptual statement. Leisure Studies, 16(1), 17–25.

The Culture and Sport Evidence (CASE) programme. (2011). Evidence of what works: Evaluated projects to drive up engagement (No. January; p. 19). Retrieved from Culture and Sport Evidence (CASE) programme website:

Trant, J. (2009). Tagging, Folksonomy and Art Museums: Results of’s research (p. 197). Retrieved from Archives & Museum Informatics website:

United States Government. (n.d.). Federal Crowdsourcing and Citizen Science Toolkit. Retrieved 9 December 2018, from website:

Van Merriënboer, J. J. G., Kirschner, P. A., & Kester, L. (2003). Taking the load off a learner’s mind: Instructional design for complex learning. Educational Psychologist, 38(1), 5–13.

Vander Wal, T. (2007, February 2). Folksonomy. Retrieved 8 December 2018, from website:

Veldhuizen, B., & Keinan-Schoonbaert, A. (2015, February 11). MicroPasts: Crowdsourcing Cultural Heritage Research. Retrieved 8 December 2018, from Sketchfab Blog website:

Verwayen, H., Fallon, J., Schellenberg, J., & Kyrou, P. (2017). Impact Playbook for museums, libraries and archives. Europeana Foundation.

Vetter, J. (2011). Introduction: Lay Participation in the History of Scientific Observation. Science in Context, 24(02), 127–141.

von Ahn, L., & Dabbish, L. (2008). Designing games with a purpose. Communications of the ACM, 51(8), 57.

Wenger, E. (2010). Communities of practice and social learning systems: The career of a concept. In Social Learning Systems and communities of practice. Springer Verlag and the Open University.

Whitenton, K. (2013, December 22). Minimize Cognitive Load to Maximize Usability. Retrieved 12 September 2014, from Nielsen Norman Group website:

WieWasWie Project informatie. (n.d.). Retrieved 1 August 2014, from VeleHanden website:

Willett, K. (n.d.). New paper: Galaxy Zoo and machine learning. Retrieved 31 March 2015, from Galaxy Zoo website:

Wood, D., Bruner, J. S., & Ross, G. (1976). The role of tutoring in problem solving. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, and Allied Disciplines, 17(2), 89–100.