Researching and Writing David Millard

Today’s plan  Feedback on Proposal  Expert Seminars (reminder)  Researching  Potential sources  How to read so much so quickly  Plagiarism  Key Dates Reminder

Your Proposals  Due in Today  Lots of guidance will be sent out via  Please listen to the advice!  Lookout for expressions like  “steer clear of…” / “focus on…”  “structured comparison”  “balanced”  “academic literature”  Please contact us if you want to talk about your proposal or what we have said about it

Learning outcomes:  This lecture will cover the following topics:  Assembling the evidence  Sources and provenance  How to conduct library research  How to conduct good research using the internet  Important processes  Maintaining an audit trail  How to avoid plagiarism Understand:  The activities you need to undertake to assemble research evidence  Ways in which sources are acknowledged, and the reasons and purpose of referencing papers Be able to identify:  The types of evidence you will need to collect and present to support your arguments

Sources of information  How you would rate the following on a scale of (0=no authority to 10=high authority):  Flyer, website, newspaper article, book, textbook, radio programme, television documentary, academic article, technical report, manual, standards specification, magazine article, white paper  Can you add any other sources of info?

Some example sources  The Library ( )  Search Engines:  Google Scholar ( scholar.google.com)  ePrints (  ACM Portal (  Conferences:  ACM Hypertext (  ACM Multimedia (  ACM Web (  ACM CHI (  ACM Ubicomp (  Magazines (better as inspiration that sources) :  The Register ( )  Slashdot(

What to do  have a research plan  do good work  record your work  analyse the results  do you have enough sources?  are they good sources?  capture the whole process  make your own notes  using the wiki will help others  the wiki may help you too  meet your deadlines

I know what its about I could argue its case What shall I do with it?  Skim reading vs. deep reading  Skim reading (2-10 min)  Quickly check Abstract, scan for important information  Read Introduction and Conclusion  Note key points in case you want to come back to it later  Deep reading (30-60 min)  Read full article thoroughly  Read again and make decent notes so that you have your own understanding of the arguments

citations and references  write your bibliography as you go  always get full references  record how and when  collect to a standard format  (see our paper template)  ensure that all your references are complete – could a reader go to the source unaided?  some tools enable automatic formatting of citations  EndNote is a bibliographic database which works with MS Word (on uni workstations)

What is Plagiarism?  In some countries/cultures students may expect to copy  Teachers may want students to repeat exactly what is in text books or lecture notes.  In our university this is called "plagiarism" and is the wrong thing to do.  Plagiarism is what you do when you copy without acknowledging your sources  We have clear university regulations against plagiarism Plagiarism is using someone else’s work without indicating that it is not your own

What is Plagiarism? - Example The most recent generation of Web applications and Web sites have been considered by some to be fundamentally different from the ones found on the early Web, these have been grouped together under the term Web 2.0, and while the name is arguably misleading (implying a designed version and a discrete evolution) the concepts beneath it provide a valuable insight into the way in which the Web has evolved. The Web 2.0 concept is probably still too intangible for a solid classification, however it can be said that the Web 2.0 approach emphasises interaction, community and openness. [1] Millard, D. and Ross, M. (2006) Web 2.0: Hypertext by Any Other Name?. In Proceedings of ACM Conference on Hypertext and Hypermedia 2006, Odense, Denmark. The most recent generation of Web applications and Web sites have been considered by some to be fundamentally different from the ones found on the early Web, these have been grouped together under the term Web 2.0, and while the name is arguably misleading (implying a designed version and a discrete evolution) the concepts beneath it provide a valuable insight into the way in which the Web has evolved. The Web 2.0 concept is probably still too intangible for a solid classification, however it can be said that the Web 2.0 approach emphasises interaction, community and openness. [1] Millard, D. and Ross, M. (2006) Web 2.0: Hypertext by Any Other Name?. In Proceedings of ACM Conference on Hypertext and Hypermedia 2006, Odense, Denmark. Let's close by summarizing what we believe to be the core competencies of Web 2.0 companies: Services, not packaged software, with cost-effective scalability Control over unique, hard-to-recreate data sources that get richer as more people use them Trusting users as co-developers Harnessing collective intelligence Leveraging the long tail through customer self-service Software above the level of a single device Lightweight user interfaces, development models, AND business models [2] Tim O'Reilly, What Is Web 2.0: Design Patterns and Business Models for the Next Generation of Software, Published by the author 09/30/2005, is-web-20.html (accessed Oct 2006) Let's close by summarizing what we believe to be the core competencies of Web 2.0 companies: Services, not packaged software, with cost-effective scalability Control over unique, hard-to-recreate data sources that get richer as more people use them Trusting users as co-developers Harnessing collective intelligence Leveraging the long tail through customer self-service Software above the level of a single device Lightweight user interfaces, development models, AND business models [2] Tim O'Reilly, What Is Web 2.0: Design Patterns and Business Models for the Next Generation of Software, Published by the author 09/30/2005, is-web-20.html (accessed Oct 2006) Imagine we want to write something that defines Web 2.0, and that we have found these two examples…

Plagiarism – Wrong (Fail!) The most recent generation of Web applications and Web sites have been considered by some to be fundamentally different from the ones found on the early Web, these have been grouped together under the term Web 2.0, and while the name is arguably misleading (implying a designed version and a discrete evolution) the concepts beneath it provide a valuable insight into the way in which the Web has evolved. The Web 2.0 concept is probably still too intangible for a solid classification, however it can be said that the Web 2.0 approach emphasises interaction, community and openness. [1] Millard, D. and Ross, M. (2006) Web 2.0: Hypertext by Any Other Name?. In Proceedings of ACM Conference on Hypertext and Hypermedia 2006, Odense, Denmark. The most recent generation of Web applications and Web sites have been considered by some to be fundamentally different from the ones found on the early Web, these have been grouped together under the term Web 2.0, and while the name is arguably misleading (implying a designed version and a discrete evolution) the concepts beneath it provide a valuable insight into the way in which the Web has evolved. The Web 2.0 concept is probably still too intangible for a solid classification, however it can be said that the Web 2.0 approach emphasises interaction, community and openness. [1] Millard, D. and Ross, M. (2006) Web 2.0: Hypertext by Any Other Name?. In Proceedings of ACM Conference on Hypertext and Hypermedia 2006, Odense, Denmark. Let's close by summarizing what we believe to be the core competencies of Web 2.0 companies: Services, not packaged software, with cost-effective scalability Control over unique, hard-to-recreate data sources that get richer as more people use them Trusting users as co-developers Harnessing collective intelligence Leveraging the long tail through customer self-service Software above the level of a single device Lightweight user interfaces, development models, AND business models [2] Tim O'Reilly, What Is Web 2.0: Design Patterns and Business Models for the Next Generation of Software, Published by the author 09/30/2005, is-web-20.html (accessed Oct 2006) Let's close by summarizing what we believe to be the core competencies of Web 2.0 companies: Services, not packaged software, with cost-effective scalability Control over unique, hard-to-recreate data sources that get richer as more people use them Trusting users as co-developers Harnessing collective intelligence Leveraging the long tail through customer self-service Software above the level of a single device Lightweight user interfaces, development models, AND business models [2] Tim O'Reilly, What Is Web 2.0: Design Patterns and Business Models for the Next Generation of Software, Published by the author 09/30/2005, is-web-20.html (accessed Oct 2006) The Web 2.0 concept is probably still too intangible for a solid classification, however it can be said that the Web 2.0 approach emphasises interaction, community and openness. Web 2.0 systems have the following characteristics: Services, not packaged software, with cost- effective scalability Control over unique, hard-to-recreate data sources that get richer as more people use them Trusting users as co-developers Harnessing collective intelligence Leveraging the long tail through customer self- service Software above the level of a single device Lightweight user interfaces, development models, AND business models

Quoting – Acceptable (2.2) The most recent generation of Web applications and Web sites have been considered by some to be fundamentally different from the ones found on the early Web, these have been grouped together under the term Web 2.0, and while the name is arguably misleading (implying a designed version and a discrete evolution) the concepts beneath it provide a valuable insight into the way in which the Web has evolved. The Web 2.0 concept is probably still too intangible for a solid classification, however it can be said that the Web 2.0 approach emphasises interaction, community and openness. [1] Millard, D. and Ross, M. (2006) Web 2.0: Hypertext by Any Other Name?. In Proceedings of ACM Conference on Hypertext and Hypermedia 2006, Odense, Denmark. The most recent generation of Web applications and Web sites have been considered by some to be fundamentally different from the ones found on the early Web, these have been grouped together under the term Web 2.0, and while the name is arguably misleading (implying a designed version and a discrete evolution) the concepts beneath it provide a valuable insight into the way in which the Web has evolved. The Web 2.0 concept is probably still too intangible for a solid classification, however it can be said that the Web 2.0 approach emphasises interaction, community and openness. [1] Millard, D. and Ross, M. (2006) Web 2.0: Hypertext by Any Other Name?. In Proceedings of ACM Conference on Hypertext and Hypermedia 2006, Odense, Denmark. Let's close by summarizing what we believe to be the core competencies of Web 2.0 companies: Services, not packaged software, with cost-effective scalability Control over unique, hard-to-recreate data sources that get richer as more people use them Trusting users as co-developers Harnessing collective intelligence Leveraging the long tail through customer self-service Software above the level of a single device Lightweight user interfaces, development models, AND business models [2] Tim O'Reilly, What Is Web 2.0: Design Patterns and Business Models for the Next Generation of Software, Published by the author 09/30/2005, is-web-20.html (accessed Oct 2006) Let's close by summarizing what we believe to be the core competencies of Web 2.0 companies: Services, not packaged software, with cost-effective scalability Control over unique, hard-to-recreate data sources that get richer as more people use them Trusting users as co-developers Harnessing collective intelligence Leveraging the long tail through customer self-service Software above the level of a single device Lightweight user interfaces, development models, AND business models [2] Tim O'Reilly, What Is Web 2.0: Design Patterns and Business Models for the Next Generation of Software, Published by the author 09/30/2005, is-web-20.html (accessed Oct 2006) “The Web 2.0 concept is probably still too intangible for a solid classification, however it can be said that the Web 2.0 approach emphasises interaction, community and openness.” [1] Web 2.0 systems have the following characteristics (taken from [2]): Services, not packaged software, with cost- effective scalability Control over unique, hard-to-recreate data sources that get richer as more people use them Trusting users as co-developers Harnessing collective intelligence Leveraging the long tail through customer self- service Software above the level of a single device Lightweight user interfaces, development models, AND business models [1] Millard, D. and Ross, M. (2006) Web 2.0: Hypertext by Any Other Name?. In Proceedings of ACM Conference on Hypertext and Hypermedia 2006, Odense, Denmark. [2] Tim O'Reilly, What Is Web 2.0: Design Patterns and Business Models for the Next Generation of Software, Published by the author 09/30/2005, /30/what-is-web-20.html (accessed Oct 2006)

Own Words – Better (2.1) The most recent generation of Web applications and Web sites have been considered by some to be fundamentally different from the ones found on the early Web, these have been grouped together under the term Web 2.0, and while the name is arguably misleading (implying a designed version and a discrete evolution) the concepts beneath it provide a valuable insight into the way in which the Web has evolved. The Web 2.0 concept is probably still too intangible for a solid classification, however it can be said that the Web 2.0 approach emphasises interaction, community and openness. [1] Millard, D. and Ross, M. (2006) Web 2.0: Hypertext by Any Other Name?. In Proceedings of ACM Conference on Hypertext and Hypermedia 2006, Odense, Denmark. The most recent generation of Web applications and Web sites have been considered by some to be fundamentally different from the ones found on the early Web, these have been grouped together under the term Web 2.0, and while the name is arguably misleading (implying a designed version and a discrete evolution) the concepts beneath it provide a valuable insight into the way in which the Web has evolved. The Web 2.0 concept is probably still too intangible for a solid classification, however it can be said that the Web 2.0 approach emphasises interaction, community and openness. [1] Millard, D. and Ross, M. (2006) Web 2.0: Hypertext by Any Other Name?. In Proceedings of ACM Conference on Hypertext and Hypermedia 2006, Odense, Denmark. Let's close by summarizing what we believe to be the core competencies of Web 2.0 companies: Services, not packaged software, with cost-effective scalability Control over unique, hard-to-recreate data sources that get richer as more people use them Trusting users as co-developers Harnessing collective intelligence Leveraging the long tail through customer self-service Software above the level of a single device Lightweight user interfaces, development models, AND business models [2] Tim O'Reilly, What Is Web 2.0: Design Patterns and Business Models for the Next Generation of Software, Published by the author 09/30/2005, is-web-20.html (accessed Oct 2006) Let's close by summarizing what we believe to be the core competencies of Web 2.0 companies: Services, not packaged software, with cost-effective scalability Control over unique, hard-to-recreate data sources that get richer as more people use them Trusting users as co-developers Harnessing collective intelligence Leveraging the long tail through customer self-service Software above the level of a single device Lightweight user interfaces, development models, AND business models [2] Tim O'Reilly, What Is Web 2.0: Design Patterns and Business Models for the Next Generation of Software, Published by the author 09/30/2005, is-web-20.html (accessed Oct 2006) It is not yet possible to classify Web 2.0, although we can say that Web 2.0 systems do encourage interaction, and they foster communities through participation and open standards [1]. Web 2.0 companies tend to offer services rather than packaged software, they control data sources that get richer as more people use them in order to harness the wisdom of crowds, they leverage the long tail, and have lightweight user interfaces/models and agile business models [2]. [1] Millard, D. and Ross, M. (2006) Web 2.0: Hypertext by Any Other Name?. In Proceedings of ACM Conference on Hypertext and Hypermedia 2006, Odense, Denmark. [2] Tim O'Reilly, What Is Web 2.0: Design Patterns and Business Models for the Next Generation of Software, Published by the author 09/30/2005, /30/what-is-web-20.html (accessed Oct 2006)

Analysis – Best (1 st class) The most recent generation of Web applications and Web sites have been considered by some to be fundamentally different from the ones found on the early Web, these have been grouped together under the term Web 2.0, and while the name is arguably misleading (implying a designed version and a discrete evolution) the concepts beneath it provide a valuable insight into the way in which the Web has evolved. The Web 2.0 concept is probably still too intangible for a solid classification, however it can be said that the Web 2.0 approach emphasises interaction, community and openness. [1] Millard, D. and Ross, M. (2006) Web 2.0: Hypertext by Any Other Name?. In Proceedings of ACM Conference on Hypertext and Hypermedia 2006, Odense, Denmark. The most recent generation of Web applications and Web sites have been considered by some to be fundamentally different from the ones found on the early Web, these have been grouped together under the term Web 2.0, and while the name is arguably misleading (implying a designed version and a discrete evolution) the concepts beneath it provide a valuable insight into the way in which the Web has evolved. The Web 2.0 concept is probably still too intangible for a solid classification, however it can be said that the Web 2.0 approach emphasises interaction, community and openness. [1] Millard, D. and Ross, M. (2006) Web 2.0: Hypertext by Any Other Name?. In Proceedings of ACM Conference on Hypertext and Hypermedia 2006, Odense, Denmark. Let's close by summarizing what we believe to be the core competencies of Web 2.0 companies: Services, not packaged software, with cost-effective scalability Control over unique, hard-to-recreate data sources that get richer as more people use them Trusting users as co-developers Harnessing collective intelligence Leveraging the long tail through customer self-service Software above the level of a single device Lightweight user interfaces, development models, AND business models [2] Tim O'Reilly, What Is Web 2.0: Design Patterns and Business Models for the Next Generation of Software, Published by the author 09/30/2005, is-web-20.html (accessed Oct 2006) Let's close by summarizing what we believe to be the core competencies of Web 2.0 companies: Services, not packaged software, with cost-effective scalability Control over unique, hard-to-recreate data sources that get richer as more people use them Trusting users as co-developers Harnessing collective intelligence Leveraging the long tail through customer self-service Software above the level of a single device Lightweight user interfaces, development models, AND business models [2] Tim O'Reilly, What Is Web 2.0: Design Patterns and Business Models for the Next Generation of Software, Published by the author 09/30/2005, is-web-20.html (accessed Oct 2006) Millard and Ross argue that it is not yet possible to fully classify Web 2.0, although they say that Web 2.0 systems do encourage interaction, and foster communities through participation and open standards [1]. O’Reilly does attempt such a classification, but by focusing on the commercial characteristics of Web 2.0. He suggests that Web 2.0 companies tend to offer services rather than packaged software, control data sources that get richer as more people use them in order to harness the wisdom of crowds, leverage the long tail, and have lightweight user interfaces/models and agile business models [2]. [1] Millard, D. and Ross, M. (2006) Web 2.0: Hypertext by Any Other Name?. In Proceedings of ACM Conference on Hypertext and Hypermedia 2006, Odense, Denmark. [2] Tim O'Reilly, What Is Web 2.0: Design Patterns and Business Models for the Next Generation of Software, Published by the author 09/30/2005, /30/what-is-web-20.html (accessed Oct 2006)

Summary  Consider what are the best sources  Use lesser sources as inspiration  Peer reviewed conferences or journals are best  Try to avoid opinion pieces  Learn to skim and deep read  Record your research  Avoid Plagiarism  Have fun creating your paper – Find your story!