@article {9998,
	title = {Examining Open Innovation in Science (OIS): What Open Innovation can and cannot offer the science of science},
	journal = {Innovation: Organization \& Management},
	year = {2021},
	abstract = {<p>Scholars across disciplines increasingly hear calls for more open and collaborative approaches to scientific research. The concept of Open Innovation in Science (OIS) provides a framework that integrates dispersed research efforts aiming to understand the antecedents, contingencies, and consequences of applying open and collaborative research practices. While the OIS framework has already been taken up by science of science scholars, its conceptual underpinnings require further specification. In this essay, we critically examine the OIS concept and bring to light two key aspects: 1) how OIS builds upon Open Innovation (OI) research by adopting its attention to boundary-crossing knowledge flows and by adapting other concepts developed and researched in OI to the science context as exemplified by two OIS cases in the area of research funding; 2) how OIS conceptualises knowledge flows across boundaries. While OI typically focuses on well-defined organizational boundaries, we argue that blurry and even invisible boundaries between communities of practice may more strongly constrain flows of knowledge related to openness and collaboration in science. Given the uptake of this concept, this essay brings needed clarity to the meaning of OIS, which has no particular normative orientation toward a close coupling between science and industry. We end by outlining the essay{\textquoteright}s contributions to OI and the science of science, as well as to science practitioners.</p>},
	doi = {10.1080/14479338.2021.1999248},
	author = {Susanne Beck and Marcel LaFlamme and Carsten Bergenholtz and Marcel Bogers and Tiare-Maria Brasseur and Marie-Louise Conradsen and Kevin Crowston and Diletta Di Marco and Agnes Effert and Despoina Filiou and Lars Frederiksen and Thomas Gillier and Marc Gruber and Carolin Haeussler and Karin Hoisl and Olga Kokshagina and Maria-Theresa Norn and Marion Poetz and Gernot Pruschak and Laia Pujol Priego and Agnieszka Radziwon and Alexander Ruser and Henry Sauermann and Sonali Shah and Julia Suess-Reyes and Christopher L. Tucci and Philipp Tuertscher and Jane Bj{\o}rn Vedel and Roberto Verganti and Jonathan Wareham and Sunny Mosangzi Xu}
}
@article {9999,
	title = {Stages of motivation for contributing user-generated content:  A theory and empirical test},
	journal = {International Journal of Human-Computer Studies},
	volume = {109},
	year = {2018},
	pages = {89-101},
	publisher = {Syracuse University},
	address = {Syracuse, NY},
	abstract = {<p>User-generated content (UGC) projects involve large numbers of mostly unpaid contributors collaborating to create content. Motivation for such contributions has been an active area of research. In prior research, motivation for contribution to UGC has been considered a single, static and individual phenomenon. In this paper, we argue that it is instead three separate but interrelated phenomena. Using the theory of helping behaviour as a framework and integrating social movement theory, we propose a stage theory that distinguishes three separate sets (initial, sustained and meta) of motivations for participation in UGC. We test this theory using a data set from a Wikimedia Editor Survey (Wikimedia Foundation, 2011). The results suggest several opportunities for further refinement of the theory but provide support for the main hypothesis, that different stages of contribution have distinct motives. The theory has implications for both researchers and practitioners who manage UGC projects.</p>},
	doi = {10.1016/j.ijhcs.2017.08.005 },
	attachments = {https://floss.syr.edu/sites/crowston.syr.edu/files/crowston\%20fagnot\%20to\%20distribute.pdf},
	author = {Kevin Crowston and Fagnot, Isabelle}
}
@proceedings {crowston2012,
	title = {Amazon Mechanical Turk: A research tool for organizations and information systems scholars},
	volume = {389},
	year = {2012},
	month = {12/2012},
	pages = {210-221},
	publisher = {Springer},
	address = {Tampa, FL},
	isbn = {978-3-642-35141-9},
	issn = {1868-4238},
	doi = {10.1007/978-3-642-35141-9},
	attachments = {https://floss.syr.edu/sites/crowston.syr.edu/files/3890210.pdf},
	author = {Kevin Crowston},
	editor = {Anol Bhattacherjee and Brian Fitzgerald}
}
@proceedings {Crowston:2008c,
	title = {The motivational arc of massive virtual collaboration},
	year = {2008},
	note = {Please refer to the more recent version of the paper. },
	month = {1{\textendash}2 July},
	address = {L{\"u}neberg, Germany},
	abstract = {Massive virtual collaborations (MVC) involve large numbers of mostly unpaid contributors collectively creating new content. Wikipedia is the most dramatic example of MVC; smaller-scale examples include blogs and discussion groups and free/libre open source software (FLOSS) projects. In this paper, we propose a model of motivations for contribution to MVC that integrates various theoretical perspectives to extend prior work. Specifically, we distinguish three different levels of contribution to projects (initial, sustained and meta) and capture the dynamic and recursive effects of contributions on emergent individual and project states.},
	attachments = {https://floss.syr.edu/sites/crowston.syr.edu/files/MortivationalArc.pdf},
	author = {Kevin Crowston and Fagnot, Isabelle}
}
