1,720,979 research outputs found
Investigating the ‘effort-information trade-off’ between different survey response modes.
No full textBackground:
Conventional (i.e., discrete, or point-valued) quantitative survey response modes are well-established and relatively efficient. However, these methods disregard potentially valuable information associated with individual responses, such as uncertainty, variability, vagueness, or ambiguity. It is possible to capture this information by increasing the workload associated with the survey; either by adding more point-valued questions, or by increasing the complexity of the response mode used (e.g., using multi-step elicitation of each response).
Recent research has investigated the effectiveness of an emerging ‘ellipse response mode’, which is designed to elicit interval-valued responses with maximum efficiency and ease of use. This has demonstrated the efficacy of this response mode to capture multiple sources of set-valued information (both disjunctive & conjunctive—e.g., uncertainty & vagueness—cf. Ellerby et al., 2021). It has also established that, in certain circumstances, respondents do not subjectively find it to increase workload versus a conventional (i.e., point) response mode, and prefer it overall (cf. Ellerby & Wagner, 2021).
However, as yet unpublished results, comparing accuracy of point (VAS) vs interval-valued estimates on a simple perceptual judgement task, found no substantial differences in aggregated (i.e., ‘crowd’) judgements between point and interval-valued response modes. Results also indicated no significant relationship in this case between interval widths and individual estimate accuracy. Therefore, weighting intervals by width (i.e., by [un]certainty) during the aggregation process could not offer improved group estimates.
Research Questions:
The presently proposed study aims to extend this body of research in several directions, to address a range of research questions, listed below:
1. What is the relationship between interval width and estimate accuracy and when is it evident (i.e., what factors impact this)?
2. Do previous results concerning the capacity of ellipse responses to capture response uncertainty (cf. Ellerby et al., 2021) replicate with a larger and more representative sample?
3. Do previous results concerning positive user evaluation of the ellipse response mode (by comparison with point responses—cf. Ellerby & Wagner, 2021) replicate with a larger and more representative sample?
4. How does the ellipse response mode compare to that of a wider range of alternatives (i.e., VAS, VAS with confidence, FRS)? In terms of:
a. Information capture?
b. Subjective user evaluation (including overall response preference)?
c. An objective workload measure (response time)?
5. Are some response modes more suited to [un]certain circumstances than others? I.e., how does degree of task uncertainty impact:
a. Estimate accuracy?
b. Meta-information about confidence or [un]certainty – do some response modes permit better accounting for inter-rater variance in knowledge or competence when aggregating estimates from multiple raters?
c. Subjective user evaluation (including overall response preference)?
d. An objective workload measure (response time)?
6. Do either information capture or user acceptance of different response modes vary depending upon user demographic factors (i.e., age, gender, native language, education)?
In practice, the study is pitched in the domain of Citizen Science, focusing on counting the number of penguins present in a series of images, some of which will be manipulated to be less clear than others. Respondents will be tasked with reporting their estimates using one of four response modes, and they will be incentivised to do so as accurately as possible through a prize, which can be won in addition to their basic inconvenience allowance
Capturing richer information: On establishing the validity of an interval-valued survey response mode
No full textCapturing richer information: On establishing the validity of an interval-valued survey response mode
No full textEvaluating emerging data capture techniques for identification of individual preference flexibility and cross-consumer consensus in FMCG design.
No full textBackground:
Individual-level personalisation of FMCGs remains uneconomical. Nonetheless, data-driven product design could offer rapid adjustment to consumer trends in areas where consensus can be identified. This study forms part of a project building on recent inter-disciplinary research into efficient methods for active capture of uncertainty and range in human responses (cf. Ellerby et al., 2019; 2020; 2021; Ellerby & Wagner, 2021; Wagner et al., 2015)—with the aim of applying this to the capture of flexibility, or ‘leeway’, in consumer preferences. The rationale here is that this approach may be intrinsically well-suited to identification of areas of consumer consensus, which would otherwise go undetected, and which could valuably inform decisions about product design and market segmentation, while giving consumers’ back more active choice in the product design process. By enabling products tailored to those with compatible (rather than identical) preferences, this could provide a basis for accessible, scalable, and thus commercially viable data-driven FMCG customisation.
The planned study detailed here is designed to validate the proposed application of interval-valued consumer preference elicitation, in terms of its putative capability to identify preference flexibility, and thereby inform areas of ‘hidden consensus’.
Research Questions:
The study will assess performance of the interval preference elicitation approach by empirical comparison with a more conventional (i.e., point-valued) control condition. It is designed to answer the following research questions:
1. Can interval-valued ratings reliably determine more and less flexible preferences?
a. Between individuals (i.e., who is more flexible)?
b. Within individuals (i.e., what are people more flexible about)?
2. Can interval-valued ratings reliably delineate ‘tolerance ranges’ (i.e., predict acceptable vs unacceptable products for individuals)?
3. Can interval-valued ratings identify and locate areas of ‘hidden consensus’ between groups of consumers (i.e., predict which products are considered mutually acceptable across a set of individuals more effectively than conventional approaches)?
4. Can using interval-valued ratings improve consumer engagement and satisfaction with the product design process (by comparison with the control condition)?
a. Do people perceive interval-valued preference specification to be easier to use, more unnecessarily complex, and/or more effective?
b. Do people prefer the interval- or point-valued preference specification process overall?
c. Which factors are important in determining overall liking of a preference specification method?
d. Do people perceive any differences in the amount, identifiability, or privateness of the personal preference data provided with each response mode?
e. Do people feel more comfortable overall with the preference data they provide using either response mode?
f. Which factors are important in determining overall comfort with the preference data provided?
5. Does use of the interval-valued preference specification technique vary depending upon user demographic factors (i.e., age, gender, native language, education)?
a. Do men underestimate their preference flexibility using the interval specification technique, relative to women?
6. Do acceptance and/or perceptions of characteristics of the two preference capture techniques (e.g., ease-of-use, effectiveness, privacy) vary depending upon user demographic factors (i.e., age, gender, native language, education)?
Data collection summary:
In practice, respondents will complete a four-stage survey study. In Stage 1, they will complete a simulated market research survey—providing their stated preferences concerning key characteristics of a variety of food-based consumer goods. In Stage 2, participants will provide their own subjective user feedback concerning key characteristics of the responses given in the previous section, and the response mode used to provide them. In Stage 3, participants will be shown a series of consumer products, varying along the dimensions they were previously asked to specify their preferences for, and they will be asked whether they would buy each product. Stage 4 will solicit demographic information, concerning participants’ age, gender, native language, ethnicity, and highest educational level, as well as asking participants how often they currently consume each product type
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
- …
