INLS 180 Day 5 Notes

February 6, 2003

 

1. One minute papers

Main Points

Social impact on human behavior

Noumenal clouds as metaphor for ideas/senses; the process of becoming aware

Technology can develop its own development/evolution

Articulating and hearing others articulate project ideas helps

S curve adoption pattern

Verbots

Problem of keeping up with change/technology

Like attracts like

IRBs

Range and creativity in the project ideas

Access to information not enough, relevance and timeliness required

All the ‘stuff’ behind terms we understand (and the need or question for depth for professional usage vs common language usage)

 

Questions

Concerns about readings discussion—are we missing points?

Can we depict the relationships between external knowledge influence on queries? On non-relevant, non-retrieved info and relevant retrieved?

ASK???  What is it?  Tried? Implemented?

Was Tannen about diversity training for the class?

Drag factors (attenuation) on adoption/diffusion, e.g., emotional attachment to objects/practices?

How far/long will people tolerate the de-individualization of their personal interactions?

How about the case when people state their question too specifically? (the no hits problem)

Why only try to make it easier for people to interact with machines?

What is our responsibility/role as info specialists to users?

Automated reference implications for reference librarians?

 

2. User Needs

  1. Assessing User Needs
    1. Library of Congress NDL Project  http://ils.unc.edu/~march/revision.pdf

                                                               i.      Reading room interviews and observations

                                                             ii.      Day-care center questionnaire

                                                            iii.      Document analysis

    1. Bureau of Labor Statistics Project http://ils.unc.edu/~march/blsreport/mainbls.html

                                                               i.      Expert critiques

                                                             ii.      Interviews (staff)

                                                            iii.      Focus groups (users)

                                                           iv.      Email content analysis

                                                             v.      Usabilty tests

                                                           vi.      Transaction log analyses

 

3. The information seeking process (PP slides)

 

4. Readings discussions

 

Dervin, B., & Nilan, M. [Debbie Glackin]

 

Marchionini, G. (1995).

 

5. Read for next meeting:

Harter, S. P. (1992). Psychological relevance and information science.  (JASIST online) [Harter: Julie Kimbrough & Megan Lafferty]

 

Schamber, L., Eisenberg, M. B., & Nilan, M. S. (1990). A re-examination of relevance: Toward a dynamic, situational definition. [Mary White]

 

Amento, B., Terveen, L., & Hill, W. (2000). Does ‘authority’ mean quality? Predicting expert quality ratings of web documents.  Proceedings of ACM SIGIR (Athens, July 24-28).  296-303. ( ACM Digital Library).  [Marlan Brinkley]

 

 

6. One-minute paper

What was the big point you learned in class today?

What is the main, unanswered question you leave class with today?