Skip to main content
Book cover

Advances in Spatial Data Handling and Analysis pp 65–84Cite as

Identifying Optimal Study Areas and Spatial Aggregation Units for Point-Based VGI from Multiple Sources

Part of the Advances in Geographic Information Science book series (AGIS)

Abstract

In this paper, we introduce a new metric for evaluating feasible VGI study areas and the appropriateness of different aggregation unit sizes through three different components of data quality: coverage, density, and user-heterogeneity. Two popular sources of passive VGI are used for initial testing of the metric: Twitter and Flickr. We compare the component and aggregate measures for different simulated point processes and demonstrate the properties of this metric. The three components are assessed iteratively for the point user generated data (tweets and photos) on a local basis by altering grain sizes. We demonstrate the application of this metric with Flickr and Twitter data obtained for three Canadian cities as initial study areas, including Vancouver, Toronto, and Moncton. The utility of the metric for discriminating qualitatively different types of VGI is evaluated for each of these areas based on a relative comparison framework. Finally, we present a use-case for this metric: identifying the optimal spatial grain and extent for a given data set. The results of this analysis will provide a methodology for preliminary evaluation of VGI quality within a given study area, and identify sub-areas with desirable characteristics.

Keywords

  • VGI
  • Social media
  • Optimal grain

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Chapter
GBP   19.95
Price includes VAT (United Kingdom)
  • DOI: 10.1007/978-3-319-19950-4_5
  • Chapter length: 20 pages
  • Instant PDF download
  • Readable on all devices
  • Own it forever
  • Exclusive offer for individuals only
  • Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout
eBook
GBP   79.50
Price includes VAT (United Kingdom)
  • ISBN: 978-3-319-19950-4
  • Instant PDF download
  • Readable on all devices
  • Own it forever
  • Exclusive offer for individuals only
  • Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout
Softcover Book
GBP   99.99
Price includes VAT (United Kingdom)
Hardcover Book
GBP   129.99
Price includes VAT (United Kingdom)
Learn about institutional subscriptions
Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8

References

  • Baddeley A, Turner R (2005) Spatstat: an R package for analysing spatial point pattern. J Stat Softw 12:1–42

    Google Scholar 

  • Coleman D, Georgiadou Y, Labonte J (2009) Volunteered geographic information: the nature and motivation of produsers. Int J Spat Data Infrastruct Res 4:332–358

    Google Scholar 

  • Croitoru A, Crooks A, Radzikowski J, Stefanidis A (2013) Geosocial gauge: a system prototype for knowledge discovery from social media. Int J Geogr Inf Sci 27(12):2483–2508

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Crooks A, Croitoru A, Stefanidis A, Radzikowski J (2013) #Earthquake: Twitter as a distributed sensor system. Trans GIS 17(1):124–147

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Foody G, See L, Fritz S, Van der Velde M, Perger C, Schill C, Boyd DS (2013) Assessing the accuracy of volunteered geographic information arising from multiple contributors to an internet based collaborative project. Trans GIS 17(6):847–860

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Goodchild M (2007) Citizens as sensors: the world of volunteered geography. GeoJournal 69:211–221

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Goodchild M, Glennon J (2010) Crowdsourcing geographic information for disaster response: a research frontier. Int J Digital Earth 3:231–241

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Goodchild M, Janelle D (2010) Toward critical spatial thinking in the social sciences and humanities. GeoJournal 75:3–13

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Granell C, Belmonte O, Diaz L (2014) Geospatial information infrastructures to address spatial needs in health: collaboration, challenges, and opportunities. Future Gener Comput Syst 31:213–222

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Haklay M (2010) How good is volunteered geographical information? A comparative study of OpenStreetMap and ordnance survey datasets. Environ Plan 37:682–703

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Hollenstein L, Purves R (2010) Exploring place through user-generated content: using Flickr tags to describe city cores. J Spat Inf Sci 1:21–48

    Google Scholar 

  • Jeffery C, Ozonoff A, Pagano M (2014) The effect of spatial aggregation on performance when mapping a risk of disease. Int J Health Geographics 13(9):1–9

    Google Scholar 

  • Jenkins C, Pimm S, Joppa L (2013) Global patterns of terrestrial vertebrate diversity and conservation. PNAS 110(28):E2602–E2610

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Lacklan K, Spence P, Lin X (2014) Expressions of risk awareness and concern through Twitter: on the utility of using the medium as an indication of audience needs. Comput Hum Behav 35:554–559

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Li L, Goodchild M, Xu B (2013) Spatial, temporal, and socioeconomic patterns in the use of Twitter and Flickr. Cartography Geographic Inf Sci 40:61–77

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • McKenzie G, Janowicz K (2014) Coerced geographic information: the not-so-voluntary Side of User-generated geo-content. In: Extended abstracts of the eighth international conference on geographic information science (GIScience 2014). Vienna, Austria

    Google Scholar 

  • McKenzie G, Janowicz K, Adams B (2014) A weighted multi-attribute method for matching user-generated points of interest. Cartography Geographic Inf Sci 41(2):125–137

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Mearns G, Simmonds R, Richardson R, Turner M, Watson P, Missier P (2014) Tweet my street: a cross-disciplinary collaboration for the analysis of local twitter data. Future Internet 6(2):378–396

    Google Scholar 

  • Mooney P, Corcoran P (2013) Understanding the roles of communities in volunteered geographic information projects. Progress in location-based services. Springer, Berlin, pp 357–371

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Mooney P, Corcoran P, Ciepluch B (2013) The potential for using volunteered geographic information in pervasive health computing applications. J Ambient Intell Humaniz Comput 4(6):731–745

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Neis P, Zielstra D, Zipf A (2013) Comparison of volunteered geographic information data contributions and community development for selected world regions. Future Internet 5:282–300

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Neis P, Zielstra D (2014) Generation of a tailored routing network for disabled people based on collaboratively collected geodata. Appl Geogr 47:70–77

    Google Scholar 

  • Openshaw S, Taylor P (1979) A million or so correlation coefficients: three experiments on the modifiable areal unit problem. In: Wrigley N (ed) Statistical applications in the spatial sciences. Pion, London, pp 127–144

    Google Scholar 

  • Ripley BD (1977) Modelling spatial patterns. J Roy Stat Soc B Met 172–212

    Google Scholar 

  • Stefanidis A, Crooks A, Radzikowski J (2011) Harvesting ambient geospatial information from social media feeds. GeoJournal 78(2):319–338

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Zielstra D, Zipf A (2010) A comparative study of proprietary geodata and volunteered geographic information for Germany. In: 13th AGILE international conference on geographic information science, 2010

    Google Scholar 

  • Zook M, Graham M, Shelton T, Gorman S (2012) Volunteered geographic information and crowdsourcing disaster relief: a case study of the Haitian earthquake. World Med Health Policy 2:7–33

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Geography and Environmental Management, University of Waterloo, Waterloo, Canada

    Haydn Lawrence

  2. Department of Geography and Environmental Studies, Wilfrid Laurier University, Waterloo, Canada

    Colin Robertson

  3. School of Planning, University of Waterloo, Waterloo, Canada

    Rob Feick

  4. Department of Geography, University of Victoria, Victoria, Canada

    Trisalyn Nelson

Authors
  1. Haydn Lawrence
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Colin Robertson
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Rob Feick
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Trisalyn Nelson
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Haydn Lawrence .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Geography, Environment and Society, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, Minnesota, USA

    Francis Harvey

  2. Dept. of Geography and Resource Management, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong SAR, China

    Yee Leung

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

Copyright information

© 2015 Springer International Publishing Switzerland

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Lawrence, H., Robertson, C., Feick, R., Nelson, T. (2015). Identifying Optimal Study Areas and Spatial Aggregation Units for Point-Based VGI from Multiple Sources. In: Harvey, F., Leung, Y. (eds) Advances in Spatial Data Handling and Analysis. Advances in Geographic Information Science. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-19950-4_5

Download citation