INLS 180 Day 7 Notes
Oct. 12, 2005
Note, fall break next week, no class---Projects!!!
Points
Relevance is in the mind of the perceiver/receiver
Popularity as surrogate for quality ??????
There is an endless dance between search engines and exploiters
We need experts!
Challenges of permanence of personal information
Questions
How do balance authority and ‘collective consciousness” ?
Do egalitarianism and elitism mutually exclusive?
If number of pages or images are indicators of quality, won’t webmasters game the system (yes, spam the search engines)
When will bottom-up, community driven info services merge with top-down expert services?
Any work on user-tuned search engines (e.g., children portals that use different kinds of ranking algorithms)?
How can we even imagine that experts will go away?
Other quantitative measures of retrieval than relevance-based?
What has changed over time wrt ‘relevance’especially in last 10-15 years?
How do we judge expertise and implications for IR?
How close do we aim to satisfy psychological relevance and how close can we come?
i. EPIC a provocation, time and $ pressures lead to customization/efficiency but deter creativity/spontaneity and challenge privacy
ii. Fogg a follow up to Media Equation and the mammalian brain vs the technology augmented mind
Fogg: Group 9
McInerney: Group 10
Rosenfeld: Group 1
Lippincott: Group 2
Janes, J. (2002). Digital Reference: Reference librarians experiences and attitudes. JASIST, 53(7), 549-566. (online)
Dewdney & Sheldrick Ross (1994). Flying a light aircraft: Reference service evaluation from a users viewpoint. RQ 34(2), 217-30. (SILS reserve)
4. One-minute paper concept
What was the big point you learned in class today?
What is the main, unanswered question you leave class with today?