1,720,986 research outputs found
T4I2016 - James, Abi; Draffan, E.A.; Cudd, Peter; Bentley, Claire: Terminology, understanding AT and practice
No full textJames, Abi; Draffan,
E.A.; Cudd, Peter; Bentley, Claire: Terminology, understanding AT and practice.
T4I Communications 1, T4I2016 – Knowledge
Transfer, Nov 2016. Figshare.
A workshop explored common
challenges to assistive technology practice across a wide range of service
providers and AT disciplines. The authors examine whether a lack of common
terminology was hindering cross-sector cooperation.</p
Designing the marriage of Open Innovation and User Participation
No full textObjective. To explore and resolve any philosophical differences and pragmatic implementation issues to make the best of open innovation and end user participation in the Assistive Technology(AT) field. From this inform the design of the REALISE online open innovation community tool. Main content. Open innovation and user participation methodologies initially seem to be compatible. The definitions of Open Innovation and the claimed strengths and weaknesses, end-user participation and its strengths and weaknesses, and, a ‘marriage’ between these approaches are all presented. Further consideration reveals that evidence and usual practice in open innovation clashes with principles of user participation in the AT field and what is called ‘patient and public involvement’ in the UK. Results. In trying to establish a design for the REALISE project online platform it became apparent to project team members that there are some philosophical clashes that impact pragmatic implementation. An approach to allow the best of these two methods to be utilized for the AT field is proposed. This draws on consistency of treatment of stakeholders. It maintains the likely scenario of AT users specifying their needs and, innovators and manufacturers proposing and implementing, respectively, solutions. How the proposed approach can work with user centred design and evaluation processes is also described to further demonstrate suitability for the AT field. The practical implementation of some of these findings can be seen in REALISE. Conclusion. With the lack of hard evidence to draw on in a situation that incorporates methodological innovation it is necessary to systematically analyse and propose solutions to test. In principle it is possible to bring Open Innovation and User Participation together into a single logical approach that is self consistent and acceptable to the AT field. One important benefit should be natural involvement of users in the entire process – idea to product and use. The long term proof of the proposed solution by definition requires evidence acquired with more time and attempts to use it and to adapt it through collection of more evidence
An experiment in online AT open innovation
No full textObjective. To initiate an experiment to see if an online tool can facilitate creation of new Assistive Technology (AT) through open innovation that engages the public (primarily end users and carers), prescribers, innovators and manufacturers. The final results and conclusions of the funded project which focus on AT relevant to access and use of Information Technology will be included in the poster. Main content. The REALISE project has created a prototype online platform. Open innovation is not widely employed in AT and so the approach in the platform assumes AT community members will explore the use of open innovation. The platform thus needs: information (definitions, guidance, and discussion of motivations of stakeholders), inclusive human computer interfacing, and open innovation process tools. Additionally, while good communication will be fundamentally important there are several other functional broad dimensions, ergonomic, language, educating and external connections/interaction. Solutions addressing these dimensions have to suit and excite the people expected to form the community otherwise user engagement is likely to be poor. Results. The platform website design and functioning is summarized, showing the open innovation framework employed (i.e. idea, incubator and project) and the use of an open community based solution as a market place for open source assistive technology engagement. The project's one year duration allowed for only one prototype to be developed and explored, so design decisions were made largely based on drawing parallels from other contexts and adhoc consultations with stakeholders. As in change management strategies, a bias to involve those who understood and were keen to try REALISE was employed, hoping that these people could then become advocates for open innovation in general and REALISE specifically. Networking to key external organisations was used both for promotion and engagement in the study. Conclusion. Designing any completely new service where a significant number of the potential users are not usually involved in the processes is challenging. The need for open innovation novices to gain access to support is seen as essential. Due to the project constraints a more participatory involvement of stakeholders and exploration of alternative strategies was not possible. Nevertheless new knowledge was gained about the use of open innovation in the field of AT
Going Beyond Counting First Authors in Author Co-citation Analysis
Full text linkThe present study examines one of the fundamental aspects of author co-citation analysis (ACA) - the way co-citation
counts are defined. Co-citation counting provides the data on which all subsequent statistical analyses and mappings
are based, and we compare ACA results based on two different types of co-citation counting - the traditional type that
only counts the first one among a cited work's authors on the one hand and a non-traditional type that takes into
account the first 5 authors of a cited work on the other hand. Results indicate that the picture produced through this non-traditional author co-citation counting contains more coherent author groups and is therefore considerably clearer. However, this picture represents fewer specialties in the research field being studied than that produced through the traditional first-author co-citation counting when the same number of top-ranked authors is selected and analyzed. Reasons for these effects are discussed
Variations on the Author
Full text link“Variations on the Author” discusses two of Eduardo Coutinho’s recent films (Um Dia na Vida, from 2010, and Últimas Conversas, posthumously released in 2015) and their contribution to the general question of documentary authorship. The director’s filmography is characterized by a consistent yet self-effacing form of authorial self-inscription: Coutinho often features as an interviewer that rather than express opinions propels discourses; an interviewer that is good at listening. This mode of self-inscription characterizes him as an author who is not expressive but who is nonetheless markedly present on the screen. In Um Dia na Vida, however, Coutinho is completely absent form the image, while Últimas Conversas, on the contrary, includes a confessional prologue that moves the director from the margins to the center of his films. This article examines the ways in which these works stand out in the filmography of a director who offers new insights into the notion of cinematic authorship
Appropriate Similarity Measures for Author Cocitation Analysis
Full text linkWe provide a number of new insights into the methodological discussion about author cocitation analysis. We first argue that the use of the Pearson correlation for measuring the similarity between authors’ cocitation profiles is not very satisfactory. We then discuss what kind of similarity measures may be used as an alternative to the Pearson correlation. We consider three similarity measures in particular. One is the well-known cosine. The other two similarity measures have not been used before in the bibliometric literature. Finally, we show by means of an example that our findings have a high practical relevance.information science;Pearson correlation;cosine;similarity measure;author cocitation analysis
Dispelling the Myths Behind First-author Citation Counts
Full text linkWe conducted a full-scale evaluative citation analysis study of scholars in the XML research field to explore just how different from each other author rankings resulting from different citation counting methods actually are, and to demonstrate the capability of emerging data and tools on the Web in supporting more realistic citation counting methods. Our results contest some common arguments for the continued
use of first-author citation counts in the evaluation of scholars, such as high correlations between author rankings by first-author citation counts and other citation
counting methods, and high costs of using more realistic citation counting methods that are not well-supported by the ISI databases. It is argued that increasingly available digital full text research papers make it possible for citation analysis studies to go beyond what the ISI databases have directly supported and to employ more
sophisticated methods
koamabayili/VECTRON-author-checklist: VECTRON author checklist
No full textWe have done our best to complete the author checklist relating to the use of animals in the hut study. Note that the objective for the hut study was to evaluate the IRS treatment applications for residual efficacy against Anopheles mosquitoes, including the local An. coluzzii mosquito population. Cows were only used to attract mosquitoes into the huts and no tests were carried out directly on the cows. The author checklist is intended for use with studies where experiments are carried out on animals, which is why we have had such difficulty in completing this for the hut study, as many of the questions do not relate to how the cows were used
- …
