A Conceptual Model for Analyzing Contribution Patterns in the Context of VGI

  • Karl Rehrl
  • Simon Gröechenig
  • Hartwig Hochmair
  • Sven Leitinger
  • Renate Steinmann
  • Andreas Wagner
Part of the Lecture Notes in Geoinformation and Cartography book series (LNGC)


The chapter proposes a conceptual model as foundation for analyzing user contributions in the context of VGI. The conceptual model is based on a set of action and domain concepts, which are combined to a task-model describing typical tasks of volunteered geographic information contribution. As a proof-of-concept, the model is applied to two sample data sets that are extracted from the OpenStreetMap (OSM) change history. OSM data samples provide a proof-of-concept concerning the applicability of the model for crowd activity analysis. The resulting “contribution graph”, which is a graph-like structure of linked editing actions, can be used as foundation for analyzing complex contribution patterns.


VGI Crowd activity Contribution analysis Editing patterns Conceptual model 


  1. Budhathoki NR, Nedovic-Budic Z, Bertram B (2010) An interdisciplinary frame for understanding volunteered geographic information. Geomatica 64(1):313–320Google Scholar
  2. Coleman DJ (2010) The potential and early limitations of volunteered geographic information. Geomatica 64(2):209–219Google Scholar
  3. Coleman DJ, Georgiadou Y (2009) Volunteered geographic information: the nature and motivation of producers. Int J Spat Data Infrastruct Res (Special issue GSDI-11)Google Scholar
  4. Câmara G, Vinhas L, Clodoveu D, Fonseca F, Carneiro T (2009) Geographical information engineering in the 21st century. In: Research trends in geographic information science, Springer, BerlinGoogle Scholar
  5. Elwood S (2008) Volunteered geographic information: key questions, concepts and methods to guide emerging research and practice. GeoJournal 72(3–4):133–135CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Goodchild MF (2007) Citizens as sensors: the world of volunteered geography. GeoJournal 69(4):211–221CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Goodchild MF (2010) 20 years of progress: GIScience in 2010. J Spat Inf Sci 1:3–20Google Scholar
  8. Guarino N (1998) Formal ontology and information systems. In: Using ontologies for integrated geographic information systems, IOS Press, Amsterdam, pp 3–15Google Scholar
  9. Haklay M, Basiouka S, Antoniou V, Ather A (2009) How many volunteers does it take to map an area well? the validity of Linus’ law to volunteered geographic information. Geog J 47(4):1–13Google Scholar
  10. Haklay M, Weber P (2008) OpenStreetMap: user-generated street maps. IEEE Pervasive Comput 7(4):12–18Google Scholar
  11. James M (1983) Managing the data-based environment. Prentice Hall, New JerseyGoogle Scholar
  12. Kottman C (1999) The OpenGIS abstract specification, topic 8: relationships between featuresGoogle Scholar
  13. Kottman C, Reed C (2009) The OpenGIS abstract specification, topic 5: featuresGoogle Scholar
  14. Kuhn W (2001) Ontologies in support of activities in geographical space. Int J Geogr Inf Sci 15(7):613–631CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Kuhn W (2007) Volunteered geographic information and GIScience. NCGIA UC Santa Barbara, pp 13–14Google Scholar
  16. Kuuttii K (1996) Activity theory as a potential framework for human computer interaction research. In: Nardi BA (ed) Context and consciousness: activity theory and human-computer interaction. The MIT Press, Cambridge, pp 17–44Google Scholar
  17. Mark DM, Skupin A, Smith B (2001) Features, objects, and other things: ontological distinctions in the geographic domain. In: Montello DR (ed) Spatial information theory, proceedings of COSIT 2001, Springer, Berlin, vol 2205. pp 489–502Google Scholar
  18. Mooney P, Corcoran P (2011) Accessing the history of objects in openstreetmap. In: Proceedings AGILE 2011: the 14 th AGILE international conference on geographic information science, Springer, Utrecht, p 155Google Scholar
  19. Mooney P, Corcoran P (2012a) How social is openstreetmap? In: Proceedings of AGILE 2012Google Scholar
  20. Mooney P, Corcoran P (2012b) Characteristics of heavily edited objects in openstreetmap. Future Internet 4(1):285–305CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Neis P, Zielstra D, Zipf A (2011) The street network evolution of crowd sourced maps: openstreetmap in Germany 2007–2011. Future Internet 4(1):1–21CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Ramm F, Topf J (2010) OpenStreetMap, 3rd edn. Lehmanns media, BerlinGoogle Scholar
  23. Timpf S (2001) Geographic task models for geographic information processing. In: Meeting on fundamental questions in geographic information science, Manchester, UK, pp 217–229Google Scholar
  24. van Exel M, Dias E, Fruijtier S (2010) The impact of crowdsourcing on spatial data quality indicators. In: Proceedings of the 6th GIScience international conference on geographic information science, pp 213Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  • Karl Rehrl
    • 1
  • Simon Gröechenig
    • 2
  • Hartwig Hochmair
    • 3
  • Sven Leitinger
    • 1
  • Renate Steinmann
    • 1
  • Andreas Wagner
    • 1
  1. 1.Salzburg ResearchSalzburgAustria
  2. 2.Carinthia University of Applied ScienceVillachAustria
  3. 3.Fort Lauderdale Research and Education CenterUniversity of FloridaFort LauderdaleUSA

Personalised recommendations