Projects
The point of coming up with these kinds of accounts/frameworks is to say something a little more general
some of the theories we’ve discussed are models of info skkg
start from your particular case and give an acct of what’s going on there. exercise then is to think, What is this an example of?
not a separate and unique situation
think
this seems to be an example of some more general thing that we’ve been looking at in class
model using bullet list s(linguistically) or using diagrams or leah’s notion of info environments a visual of what you think is going on
models are always simplifying
when you do your presentations, talk about your case, some interesting things you saw in that setting, then explain what’s going on more generally in terms of info skkg
if you went to a diff site there might be some elements again
from concrete to abstract, particular to general
you may see an activity that intersects with another kind of activity
think of names that work
this seems like a model by soandso
some people do mathematical models, but more often it’s the case that we see diagrammatic
here are the components of my picture
time aspect—>flow charts or arrows
what has this taught me about info skkg more generally. did it surprise? confirm? something new?
suggestions for further study and she understands we won’t have knowledge of everything out there—might not be novel, but this is what i’ve learned and absorbed from the class
ratio of observation to research
strong sense of what it’s like to be there, in the setting—>your research may bring that in; part of describing the setting is how you got interested/into the setting. what i believed or read going in, what others have to say that would inform my observation
using literature and class discourse, frame your observation
a classic thing we have to think of all the time:
theory
^ |
| |
| v
data/observation
lit review<—>empirical analysis
bouncing back and forth
MT: the most surprising thing was the disregard for privacy and the fact that people didn’t object to the lack of it
when you model, you abstract out of what you’ve seen and frame the theory
topic memos—>when you begin to see themes and write them up along the way, then you go back and reevaluate
reflexive iterations
e.g., Scott’s comment on seeing that the patterns of info skkg he was seeing among low-income people is different from how things are modeled for the wealthy a la Chatman
thinking about the conditions/circumstances: maybe i’m looking at those here, but they might exist elsewhere
be thinking in terms of 10-min slots—>keep your remarks short
image of model or slides or a list
findings or abstract
post before class on the monday before class
last week we talked about precursors to info skkg
recall how this rises out of the overlap with characteristics of info seekers
we emphasized this sense of what was missing from the lists
maybe we have a fourth category, ACTION (that was my idea:-))
the precursors idea is “getting ready” what prompts someone to be engaged in this type of activity
so much of the lit is on one-off searching, but esp with ELIS, very often then case that people are engaged in inquiry as an ongoing arc punctuated by moments you divert or get what you want and delve deeper, etc.
leah wants to bookend with this question last week that the language of need only takes us so far. then the question becomes, once that state s recognized, then we do move into at least the beginnings of action. the beginnings of action we can think about as representations
this is a limited approach for the sake of clarity
representation (also can say articulation) leah made this term up for this class
when people feel ready, promoted, interested to find, learn, know something new
one large area of research is to problematize how people articulate/express this state of readiness to acquire
of course, because of the institutional framing/heritage of info seeking rich and because it’s so library centric and driven by institutional collections we end up shrinking down this whole idea of how we engage with this process to the query, esp when focusing on info retrieval
last week one of the points raised was how do we get over the gap from a state to action—>asking, saying, expressing, (Belkin, Dervin) situated info skkg they all focused on language
MT: like Foucault)
there’s a case to be made that says there is a tacit info skkg
essay in advertising by Glaser I See or Study the Market
not a question in the linguistic sense but it is a shift fro mthe state of the knower (Tefco) to what’s done
lots of the lit focuses on what’s done in terms of language, but more and more info professionals are working with things that are not necessarily linguistic
but they do have meaning embedded
MT: so shouldn’t it be called meaning
Antelope Susan Brea sp?
documentalism early 20th century philosophy of documents
about the nature of documents
made the case to librarian and archival colleagues that they had to stop thinking of docs having only things that have language used the example of the antelope in the zoo
once we put it into a context (zoo) a collection, it has been decided that the
a document by merit of its standing for something else because that creature is an example of something
MT: isn’t everything?
getting people to construct queries in ways that the systems can process (controlled vocabularies)
MT: suggestions from search engines has the popularity factor (crowd)
imposition of the institution framing what you get to know
tension between entities and Google who wants to play footsie with their clients
they want their algorithms to be robust to collect data that’s not skewed unduly
from the algorithmic point of view there are tendencies
then people game it
that’s the nature of the search domain
all of these studies of representations are oriented toward getting the seeker to use the tool in an optimal way
interesting to look at the assertions to see how much they are worried about uncertainty
Belkin: why do we expect people to ask the right question? why do we pouch them? because i want to deliver successfully
Taylor and a compromised query—>one of the strongest ideas (and one of the older ideas in this literature)
for example, it’s like a conversation in which one anticipates what the other knows to frame/express the message in a way that will be received; “some of the majesty of that sun has to be sacrificed in order to express it to others” Patrick
compromise to make it understandable — even using language does this
presumes/assumes there is some perfectly felt and understood experienced need
not necessarily the case
some cultural scholars will say that reality is experienced differently in different languages
compromise sets us up for this idealist notion of a pristine state that info seekers know their interests and understand
maybe the way we exist is through this effort to be understood
MT: i think everything we do is an effort to re-express our individual experience because we have some strange sense that it is special
aside form question-asking (the classic way) or search terms (controlled vocal vs natural language)—>strategies and barriers to get people to use these
so tied up with search process
characteristics of seekers, precursors, articulation: all presume barriers
they would have to, otherwise we’d be all-knowing
research on search processes
MT: why is it so hard to get people to think of info-seeking tools from the user perspective? because power resides in access to info
the nature of space and how people deal with it has been understudied in info studies
wise about shaping the behavior of the client (have to walk thru the mall to get to the escalator; casinos)
don’t have enough rsch on group info skkg (often delegated)
what’s the effect/consequence of the fact that we look for info in groups
MT: What could I investigate in this regard
reflects the cognitive swing; tendency to approach tasks in a logical, analytical way; she wonders about real collaborations, creative collaboration
MT: talk about flow—>Cirque de Soleil (but it still starts with individual flow)
the idea of matching, using the right words
increasing interest in browsing serendipity as we move toward ELIS
but until very recently, those kinds of activities have been considered inefficient, not professional or serious
an unserious form of info skkg, yet can be so powerful, as we know from our own experience
the next thing to think about is search techniques
Alexander 1936 on heuristics of good searching
MT: the fact that ELIS is thought of as un serious indicates the societal value placed on professional/academic/power-favored information and people PEOPLE
what are my habits when I look for something? how do people quickly get up to speed on a topic? how do we analyze our own habits of searching?
focus on search techniques has been associated with info retrieval systems (taxonomized)
interesting how much of this literature is focused on how to catalog these things; assumes a body of material different from social network theory like how people ask for advice or learn through interpersonal contacts (our first line of info skkg)
MT: this is why the phone is so vital to people
lining up the interpersonal and documental networks people use—>she hasn’t seen people look for both; as we search online, it becomes harder and harder to draw a distinction, now that social media resides amid documents, etc.
MT: i should so a study of trust in sources
Colin Doty: Misinformation in the Digital Age in Light of Digital Tools
particularly interested in how beliefs are formed
as a case study, looked at vaccine safety and how people make decisions about whether vaccines are safe or not
series on intvws with parents and public info on high rates of personal beliefs exemptions in CA schools
went the schools with the highest rates (didn’t work out well) principals said no about distributing info about the intvws
went to a more rich-oriented school
online analysis content analysis on the Internet at sources pro and anti-vaccine
also Google searches “vaccine, autism”
comments sections have been particularly fruitful
comments are often linked with Facebook
to see how people evaluate evidence the comments have been great
pulled quotes
started an initial data analysis—first impression stuff and grouped into some categories
what difference does the internet make on this? that’s why the content analysis is interesting, reflects the relationships as well as the socialized platform versus tv
claims persist even though they have been invalidated
credibility, persuasion stakeholding related to pols understanding, seeking, using info
the extent to which they look for disconfirming/confirming info
MT: look at suggested searches for this
theoretical frame
misinformation overlap with information seeking
can’t edit the internet, people say we’re overloaded by info
says misinformation will be more
counter to that is that we can easily verify because we can search broadly
(China, totalitarian info control regimes)
but we can’t verify everything
what do we verify, then? isn’t going to be what we don’t care about, nor what we already agree with
what makes you feel suspicious about something?
MT: my social media skepticism
kinds of info people want to find, when are people satisfied with their verification efforts? confirmation bias
he says people will stop searching when they find confirming info citing Zipf and Haight
MT: but if we want to make a strong argument, we have to anticipate criticism, but he doesn’t entertain this
categories
Authority: citations to evidence; own credentials; conflict of interest
(social epistemology: Internet as one gigantic collection of secondary sources)
Risk/Benefit: fearmongering; emotional personal experiences;
MT: what about the people who don’t comment? getting the two extremes—the two tales; but not a binary: a buffet of beliefs, different concerns
similar tactics on both sides
Verification?
bias affects search terms and search results
the comments reveal the belief formation of the commenters.
when you talk about the risk to children, you’re making a rhetorical, emotional move
MT: identity formation and accusation
Dr. Spock book—>Internet when mobility created more nuclear families than extended social relation/family matrix
attitudes toward authority
we always look at identity from positive perspective of what it gets one access to, but an identification with a social role/group can limit one’s ability to know
one of the dangers of categorical thinking is that things only work one way
the language plays a key role
Visible Scientist a book about speaking to the popular audience
confirmation bias as a barrier
professional status
recommendation
filter bubble
MT: people who have to work all the time not in front of a computer will be underrepresented
demographics
adversarial process
MT: he assumes that people can’t come in and read both sides and recognize the extremism; i think there is a serious flaw in choosing this sample
political discourse—>is it more polarized/binary?
MT: also overestimating likelihood of low probability events