Jove
Visualize
Contact Us
JoVE
x logofacebook logolinkedin logoyoutube logo
ABOUT JoVE
OverviewLeadershipBlogJoVE Help Center
AUTHORS
Publishing ProcessEditorial BoardScope & PoliciesPeer ReviewFAQSubmit
LIBRARIANS
TestimonialsSubscriptionsAccessResourcesLibrary Advisory BoardFAQ
RESEARCH
JoVE JournalMethods CollectionsJoVE Encyclopedia of ExperimentsArchive
EDUCATION
JoVE CoreJoVE BusinessJoVE Science EducationJoVE Lab ManualFaculty Resource CenterFaculty Site
Terms & Conditions of Use
Privacy Policy
Policies

Related Concept Videos

Social Foundations of Self II: The Generalized Other01:20

Social Foundations of Self II: The Generalized Other

463
According to George Herbert Mead, as children progress beyond the game stage, they develop a more comprehensive understanding of societal rules and norms. This cognitive and social development enables them to internalize the expectations of the broader community, refining their ability to regulate behavior.Consistent participation in organized activities is crucial in helping children recognize that their actions are not isolated but contribute to a more significant, interconnected group...
463
Social Exchange Theory01:26

Social Exchange Theory

896
As formulated by John Thibaut and Harold Kelley, Social Exchange Theory explains human relationships as economic-like exchanges that maximize rewards and minimize costs. This theory suggests that individuals engage in relationships to gain benefits and reduce burdens, similar to economic transactions. It has been widely applied to various types of relationships, including romantic, professional, and social interactions.Rewards and Costs in RelationshipsRelationship rewards include emotional...
896
Social Exchange Theory02:06

Social Exchange Theory

26.3K
We have discussed why we form relationships, what attracts us to others, and different types of love. But what determines whether we are satisfied with and stay in a relationship? One theory that provides an explanation is social exchange theory. According to social exchange theory, we act as naïve economists in keeping a tally of the ratio of costs and benefits of forming and maintaining a relationship with others (Rusbult & Van Lange, 2003).
26.3K
Social Foundations of Self IV: Self in Digital Communication01:30

Social Foundations of Self IV: Self in Digital Communication

283
Since the early 2000s, computer-mediated communication (CMC) has grown rapidly, playing a crucial role in self-development. A key distinction between CMC and real-life interactions is the lack of a physically present partner. This absence makes non-verbal cues such as facial expressions, body language, and paralinguistic signals unavailable in CMC platforms like email, instant messaging, or social media. The lack of these cues can create ambiguity and complicate how feedback is interpreted.The...
283
Horney's Sociocultural Approach01:27

Horney's Sociocultural Approach

1.3K
Karen Horney's psychoanalytic theories emphasize the potential for self-realization and the importance of addressing social and cultural, rather than biological, factors in personality development. She challenged traditional Freudian views, particularly Freud's concept of "penis envy," which she argued stemmed from cultural influences rather than inherent biological differences. Horney believed that any sense of inferiority in women was a result of societal conditioning, such as...
1.3K
Levels of Communication II: Organizational, Public, and Group Dynamics01:27

Levels of Communication II: Organizational, Public, and Group Dynamics

3.0K
Effective communication is the foundation of a good organization. Communication is the lifeblood of an organization that connects the group with messages. In an organization, communication occurs in upward, downward, and horizontal lines. Downward communication travels from the administrative and senior levels to the staff through official channels such as manuals, rules and regulations, and organizational charts. Staff members initiate upward communication, which is addressed to executives and...
3.0K

You might also read

Related Articles

Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

Sort by
Same author

ACCELERATE-BASSO: early experiences and emerging best practices for ontology development in behavioral and social science research.

Journal of biomedical semantics·2026
Same author

HuBMAP Data Portal: A Resource for Multimodal Spatial and Single-Cell Data of Healthy Human Tissues.

ArXiv·2026
Same author

Harnessing Multiteam Systems in the Development of a Multifaceted Data Repository for Emergency Public Health Response.

Journal of public health management and practice : JPHMP·2026
Same author

Knowledge Engineering for Open Science: Building and Deploying Knowledge Bases for Metadata Standards.

AI magazine·2026
Same author

The HuBMAP Framework for Advancing Data FAIRness.

bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology·2026
Same author

VO: The Vaccine Ontology.

Scientific data·2026

Related Experiment Video

Updated: May 5, 2026

The HoneyComb Paradigm for Research on Collective Human Behavior
06:48

The HoneyComb Paradigm for Research on Collective Human Behavior

Published on: January 19, 2019

10.9K

How Ontologies are Made: Studying the Hidden Social Dynamics Behind Collaborative Ontology Engineering Projects.

Markus Strohmaier1, Simon Walk, Jan Pöschko

  • 1Knowledge Management Institute, Graz University of Technology, Austria ; Stanford Center for Biomedical Informatics Research, Stanford University, USA.

Web Semantics (Online)
|December 7, 2013
PubMed
Summary

This study introduces methods to analyze social dynamics in collaborative ontology engineering. Understanding these processes is crucial for evaluating ontologies beyond their final product quality.

Keywords:
Collaborative ontology engineeringchange logsevaluation

More Related Videos

Author Spotlight: A Novel Setup to Conduct Naturalistic Laboratory Experiments with Real Human Actors in Scenarios
07:43

Author Spotlight: A Novel Setup to Conduct Naturalistic Laboratory Experiments with Real Human Actors in Scenarios

Published on: August 4, 2023

2.8K
Evidence-based Knowledge Synthesis and Hypothesis Validation: Navigating Biomedical Knowledge Bases via Explainable AI and Agentic Systems
05:47

Evidence-based Knowledge Synthesis and Hypothesis Validation: Navigating Biomedical Knowledge Bases via Explainable AI and Agentic Systems

Published on: June 13, 2025

1.9K

Related Experiment Videos

Last Updated: May 5, 2026

The HoneyComb Paradigm for Research on Collective Human Behavior
06:48

The HoneyComb Paradigm for Research on Collective Human Behavior

Published on: January 19, 2019

10.9K
Author Spotlight: A Novel Setup to Conduct Naturalistic Laboratory Experiments with Real Human Actors in Scenarios
07:43

Author Spotlight: A Novel Setup to Conduct Naturalistic Laboratory Experiments with Real Human Actors in Scenarios

Published on: August 4, 2023

2.8K
Evidence-based Knowledge Synthesis and Hypothesis Validation: Navigating Biomedical Knowledge Bases via Explainable AI and Agentic Systems
05:47

Evidence-based Knowledge Synthesis and Hypothesis Validation: Navigating Biomedical Knowledge Bases via Explainable AI and Agentic Systems

Published on: June 13, 2025

1.9K

Area of Science:

  • Semantic Technologies
  • Knowledge Representation
  • Social Dynamics in AI

Background:

  • Current ontology evaluation primarily focuses on the final ontology product.
  • Existing methods often overlook the collaborative processes and social dynamics involved in ontology creation.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To analyze the hidden social dynamics within the ontology engineering process.
  • To introduce novel measures for evaluating collaborative ontology construction.
  • To shift focus from ontologies as static products to dynamic, iterative processes.

Main Methods:

  • Utilizing historical change-log data from collaborative ontology engineering projects.
  • Applying a set of measures to analyze social dynamics.
  • Unveiling qualitative differences and commonalities between projects.

Main Results:

  • Identified qualitative differences and commonalities in collaborative ontology engineering processes.
  • Demonstrated the impact of social factors on ontology development.
  • Highlighted the invisibility of social dynamics in traditional evaluation.

Conclusions:

  • Understanding the process of ontology engineering, including social dynamics, is critical for comprehensive evaluation.
  • Advocates for new evaluation techniques that view ontologies as dynamic, collaborative, and iterative processes.
  • Suggests a move towards more holistic approaches in ontology evaluation.