Participatory action research about Figshare user experiences at the University of Melbourne

Authorea preprint 11/01/2017 DOI: 10.22541/au.150954885.58217149

Participation & feedback are welcome! Please email me on cobi.smith@unimelb.edu.au (which is treated as private unless you explicitly consent to sharing) or tweet @cobismith (public) if you'd prefer not to comment on this working paper using Authorea's features.

Please note this is an open notebook and is intended to be part of an open science research project, which means if you choose to share information here your contributions are in the public domain. See the University of Melbourne research protocols for more information: http://www.orei.unimelb.edu.au/content/when-approval-needed

#Introduction

http://researchdata.unimelb.edu.au/figshare

http://researchdata.unimelb.edu.au/figshare/features-roadmap

http://researchdata.unimelb.edu.au/figshare/figshare_comparison_table

these linked texts were written by @GoodContentKel in collaboration with the University of Melbourne's Figshare working group.

Methods theory

Participatory action research

a spiral of steps, each of which is composed of planning, action, observation and the evaluation of the result of the action... collective reflection by participants on systematic objectifications of their efforts to change the way they work (constituted by discourse, organisation and power relations, and practice). (McTaggart 2006, p315)

Action research has an individual aspect - action researchers change themselves, and a collective aspect - action researchers work with others to achieve change and to understand what it means to change. Action research involves participants in planning action (on the basis of reflection); in implementing these plans in their own action; in observing systematically this process; and in evaluating their actions in the light of evidence as a basis for further planning and action, and so on through a self-reflective spiral. In deciding just where to begin in making improvements, a group identifies an area where members perceive as cluster of problems of mutual concern and consequence. The group decides to work together on a thematic concern but to change things they must confront the culture of the institution (or programme) and society they work in. (McTaggart 2006, p317)

Progressive inquiry

Distributed expertise is a central concept in the model. Progressive inquiry intends to engage the community in a shared process of knowledge advancement, and to convey, simultaneously, the cognitive goals for collaboration. Diversity in expertise among participants, and interaction with expert cultures promotes knowledge advancement... (Muukkonen, Lakkala & Hakkarainen 2009, p3714)

The process begins by creating the context to anchor the inquiry to central conceptual principles of the domain or complex real-world problems. The learning community is established by joint planning and setting up common goals. It is important to create a social culture that supports collaborative sharing of knowledge and ideas that are in the process of being formulated and improved. (Muukkonen, Lakkala & Hakkarainen 2009, p3714)

User experience

http://tfa.stanford.edu/download/TenUsabilityHeuristics.pdf

Currently there are three main approaches to applying and interpreting user experience in
design. These are the measuring approach, the empathic approach, and the pragmatist
approach. The role of emotional experiences is important in all three, although, as they
stem from different disciplines, they treat emotions differently. (Battarbee & Koskinen 2005, p6)

These three approaches propose divergent methodologies for studying user experience,
but imply different things. The measuring approach focuses on emotional responses, the
empathic approach on user-centred concept design, while the pragmatic approach links
action to meaning. The measuring approach is useful in development and evaluation, but
is more difficult to apply at the fuzzy front