Another Word For It Patrick Durusau on Topic Maps and Semantic Diversity

September 20, 2012

Misinformation: Why It Sticks and How to Fix It

Filed under: Interface Research/Design,Usability — Patrick Durusau @ 4:43 pm

Misinformation: Why It Sticks and How to Fix It

From the post:

Childhood vaccines do not cause autism. Barack Obama was born in the United States. Global warming is confirmed by science. And yet, many people believe claims to the contrary.

Why does that kind of misinformation stick? A new report published in Psychological Science in the Public Interest, a journal of the Association for Psychological Science, explores this phenomenon. Psychological scientist Stephan Lewandowsky of the University of Western Australia and colleagues highlight the cognitive factors that make certain pieces of misinformation so “sticky” and identify some techniques that may be effective in debunking or counteracting erroneous beliefs.

The main reason that misinformation is sticky, according to the researchers, is that rejecting information actually requires cognitive effort. Weighing the plausibility and the source of a message is cognitively more difficult than simply accepting that the message is true — it requires additional motivational and cognitive resources. If the topic isn’t very important to you or you have other things on your mind, misinformation is more likely to take hold.

And when we do take the time to thoughtfully evaluate incoming information, there are only a few features that we are likely to pay attention to: Does the information fit with other things I believe in? Does it make a coherent story with what I already know? Does it come from a credible source? Do others believe it?

Misinformation is especially sticky when it conforms to our preexisting political, religious, or social point of view. Because of this, ideology and personal worldviews can be especially difficult obstacles to overcome.

Useful information for designing interfaces in general and topic maps in particular.

I leave it for others to decide which worldviews support are “information,” as opposed to “misinformation.”

But whatever your personal view of some “facts,” the same techniques should serve equally well.

PS: The taking effort to reject information is a theme explored in Thinking, Fast and Slow.

September 19, 2012

Five Lessons Learned Doing User Research in Asia

Filed under: Interface Research/Design,Usability,Users — Patrick Durusau @ 7:20 pm

Five Lessons Learned Doing User Research in Asia by Carissa Carter.

From the post:

If you have visited any country in Asia recently, you have probably seen it. Turn your head in any direction; stand up; go shopping; or check an app on your phone and you will notice products from Western companies lurking about. Some of these products are nearly identical to their counterparts overseas, and others are brand new, launched specifically for the local market.

As more and more companies are taking their products abroad, the need for user research in these new markets is increasing in importance. I spent a year spanning 2010 and 2011 living in Hong Kong and leading user research campaigns—primarily in China, Japan, and India. Through a healthy balance of trial and error (and more error), I learned a lot about leading these studies in cultures incredibly different than my own. Meta understanding with a bit of methodology mixed in, I offer you my top five lessons learned while conducting and applying user research in Asia.

Successful user interface designs change across cultures.

Is that a clue as to what happens with subject identifications?

June 13, 2011

Starfish: A Self-Tuning System for Big Data Analytics

Filed under: BigData,Hadoop,Topic Maps,Usability — Patrick Durusau @ 7:02 pm

Starfish: A Self-Tuning System for Big Data Analytics by Herodotos Herodotou, Harold Lim, Gang Luo, Nedyalko Borisov, Liang Dong, Fatma Bilgen Cetin, and Shivnath Babu, of Duke University.

Abstract:

Timely and cost-effective analytics over “Big Data” is now a key ingredient for success in many businesses, scientific and engineering disciplines, and government endeavors. The Hadoop software stack—which consists of an extensible MapReduce execution engine, pluggable distributed storage engines, and a range of procedural to declarative interfaces—is a popular choice for big data analytics. Most practitioners of big data analytics—like computational scientists, systems researchers, and business analysts—lack the expertise to tune the system to get good performance. Unfortunately, Hadoop’s performance out of the box leaves much to be desired, leading to suboptimal use of resources, time, and money (in payas- you-go clouds). We introduce Starfish, a self-tuning system for big data analytics. Starfish builds on Hadoop while adapting to user needs and system workloads to provide good performance automatically, without any need for users to understand and manipulate the many tuning knobs in Hadoop. While Starfish’s system architecture is guided by work on self-tuning database systems, we discuss how new analysis practices over big data pose new challenges; leading us to different design choices in Starfish

Accepts that usability is, at least for this project, more important than peak performance. That is the goal is to open up use of Hadoop with reasonable performance to a large number of non-expert users. That will probably do as much if not more than the native performance of Hadoop to spread its use in a number of sectors.

Makes me wonder what acceptance of usability over precision would look like for topic maps? Suggestions?

February 24, 2011

Ender’s Topic Map

Filed under: Interface Research/Design,Topic Map Software,Topic Map Systems,Usability — Patrick Durusau @ 9:06 pm

Warning: Spoiler for Ender’s game by Orson Scott Card.*

After posting my comments on the Maiana interface, in my posting Maiana February Release, I fully intended to post a suggested alternative interface.

But, comparing end results to end results isn’t going to get us much further than: “I like mine better than yours,” sort of reasoning.

It has been my experience in the topic maps community that isn’t terribly helpful or productive.

I want to use Ender’s Game to explore criteria for a successful topic map interface.

I think discussing principles of interfaces, which could be expressed any number of ways, is a useful step before simply dashing off interfaces.

Have all the children or anyone who needs to read Ender’s Game left at this point?

Good.

I certainly wasn’t a child or even young adult when I first read Ender’s Game but it was a deeply impressive piece of work.

Last warning: Spoiler immediately follows!

As you may have surmised by this point, the main character in the story is name Ender. No real surprise there.

The plot line is a familiar one, Earth is threatened by evil aliens (are there any other kind?) and is fighting a desperate war to avoid utter destruction.

Ender is selected for training at Battle School as are a number of other, very bright children. A succession of extreme situations follow, all of which Ender eventually wins, due in part to his tactical genius.

What is unknown to the reader and to Ender until after the final battle, Ender’s skills and tactics have been simultaneously used as tactics in real space battles.

Ender has been used to exterminate the alien race.

That’s what I would call a successful interface on a number of levels.

Ender’s environment wasn’t designed (at least from his view) as an actual war command center.

That is to say that it didn’t have gauges, switches, tactical displays, etc. Or at least the same information was being given to Ender, in analogous forms.

Forms that a child could understand.

First principle for topic map interfaces: Information must be delivered in a form the user will understand.

You or I may be comfortable with all the topic map machinery talk-talk but I suspect that most users aren’t.

Here’s a test of that suspicion. Go up to anyone outside of your IT department and ask the to explain how FaceBook works. Just in general terms, not the details. I’ll wait. 😉

OK, now are you satisfied that most users aren’t likely to be comfortable with topic map machinery talk-talk?

Second principle for topic map interfaces: Do not present information to all users the same way.

The military types and Ender were presented the same information in completely different ways.

Now, you may object that is just a story but I suggest that you turn on the evening news and listen to 30 minutes of Fox News and then 30 minutes of National Public Radio (A US specific example but I don’t know the nut case media in Europe.).

Same stories, one assumes the same basic facts, but you would think one or both of them had over heard an emu speaking in whispered Urdu in a crowed bus terminal.

It isn’t enough to simply avoid topic map lingo but a successful topic map interface will be designed for particular user communities.

In that regard, I think we have been mis-lead by the success or at least non-failure of interfaces for word processors, spreadsheets, etc.

The range of those applications is so limited and the utility of them for narrow purposes is so great, that they have succeeded in spite of their poor design.

So, at this point I have two principles for topic map interface design:

  • Information must be delivered in a form the user will understand.
  • Do not present information to all users the same way.

I know, Benjamin Bock, among others, is going to say this is all too theoretical, blah, blah.

Well, it is theoretical but then so is math but banking, which is fairly “practical,” would break down without math.

😉

Actually I have an idea for an interface design that at least touches on these two principles for a topic map interface.

Set your watches for 12:00 (Eastern Time US) 28 February 2010 for a mockup of such an interface.

*****
*(Wikipedia has a somewhat longer summary, Ender’s Game.)

PS: More posts on principles of topic map interfaces to follow. Along with more mockups, etc. of interfaces.

How useful any of the mockups prove to be, I leave to your judgment.

October 17, 2010

The Neighborhood Auditing Tool for the UMLS and its Source Terminologies

Filed under: Authoring Topic Maps,Interface Research/Design,Mapping,Topic Maps,Usability — Patrick Durusau @ 5:19 am

The next NCBO Webinar will be presented by Dr. James Geller from the New Jersey Institute of Technology on “The Neighborhood Auditing Tool for the UMLS and its Source Terminologies” at 10:00am PDT, Wednesday, October 20.

ABSTRACT:

The UMLS’s integration of more than 100 source vocabularies makes it susceptible to errors. Furthermore, its size and complexity can make it very difficult to locate such errors. A software tool, called the Neighborhood Auditing Tool (NAT), that facilitates UMLS auditing is presented. The NAT supports “neighborhood-based” auditing, where, at any given time, an auditor concentrates on a single focus concept and one of a variety of neighborhoods of its closely related concepts. The NAT can be seen as a special browser for the complex structure of the UMLS’s hierarchies. Typical diagrammatic displays of concept networks have a number of shortcomings, so the NAT utilizes a hybrid diagram/text interface that features stylized neighborhood views which retain some of the best features of both the diagrammatic layouts and text windows while avoiding the shortcomings. The NAT allows an auditor to display knowledge from both the Metathesaurus (concept) level and the Semantic Network (semantic type) level. Various additional features of the NAT that support the auditing process are described. The usefulness of the NAT is demonstrated through a group of case studies. Its impact is tested with a study involving a select group of auditors.


WEBEX DETAILS:
Topic: NCBO Webinar Series
Date: Wednesday, October 20, 2010
Time: 10:00 am, Pacific Daylight Time (San Francisco, GMT-07:00)
Meeting Number: 929 613 752
Meeting Password: ncbomeeting

****

Deeply edited version from NCBO Webinar – James Geller, October 20 at 10:00am PT, which has numerous other details.

If you translate “integration” as “merging,” the immediate relevance to topic maps and exploration of data sets becomes immediately obvious.

September 12, 2010

Gaming for Topic Maps?

Gaming for a Cure: Computer Gamers Tackle Protein Folding describes how over 57,000 “players” bested supercomputers:

Analysis shows that players bested the computers on problems that required radical moves, risks and long-term vision — the kinds of qualities that computers do not possess.

Distributed human contribution to massive information projects is a proven fact. (The reading programme of the OED is an earlier example.)

Can you make mapping large data sets into an interesting game?

For some clues, see: Foldit.

September 11, 2010

Google’s Instant And User Expectations

Filed under: Search Interface,Searching,Topic Map Software,Topic Maps,Usability — Patrick Durusau @ 5:35 am

Google’s Instant will change user expectations for search interfaces. Any interface that is less responsive will be viewed as less capable. Quality of results will have a minor impact on user ratings of an interface. (I am projecting the results of future surveys analyzing the failure of less responsive interfaces.)

“Instant” display of the names of topics is certainly one useful response to Google’s Instant.

Or display of relationships to other topics.

Or, displaying merging results as property values are selected.

Google’s Instant has raised the bar. Will your topic map interface met the challenge?

July 17, 2010

Learning from the Web – Article

Filed under: Database,Topic Map Software,Topic Maps,Usability — Patrick Durusau @ 7:55 pm

Learning from the Web will be five (5) years old this coming December.

Alan Bosworth (then VP of Engineering at Google) outlines eight (8) lessons from the Web.

In brief:

  1. Simple, relaxed, sloppily extensible text formats and protocols often work better than complex and efficient binary ones.
  2. It is worth making things simple enough that one can harness Moore’s law in parallel.
  3. It is acceptable to be stale much of the time.
  4. The wisdom of crowds works amazingly well.
  5. People understand a graph composed of tree-like documents (HTML) related by links (URLs).
  6. Pay attention to physics.
  7. Be as loosely coupled as possible.
  8. KISS. Keep it (the design) simple and stupid.

You will need to read the article to get the full flavor of the lessons.

His comments on how databases have failed to heed almost all the lessons of the web is interesting in light of the recent surge of NoSQL projects.

After you read the article, ask yourself how topic maps has or has not heeded the lessons of the web? If you think not, what would it take for topic maps to heed the lessons of the web?

July 10, 2010

JISC and OCLC profile the digital information seeker – Post

Filed under: Marketing,Searching,Usability — Patrick Durusau @ 9:31 am

JISC and OCLC profile the digital information seeker, a post from federatedsearchblog.com has a great summary of a report that summarizes how the way people look for information is changing.

Read this post and then watch the podcast What does the digital information seeker look like?

Full details at: Digital information seekers: How academic libraries can support the use of digital resources.

A reply I got to suggesting asking users about their needs:

I have never heard of an inventor making surveys to test things out. That is nonsense. At most what that can tell you is little details, ways to fine tune a system. It will never let you see the big changes coming.

The average user has at least as much imagination as would be tyrants of the WWW have arrogance, if not more.

I am going to ignore that advice and think you should as well.

June 21, 2010

Looking for the stranger next door – Report

Filed under: Semantic Diversity,Usability — Patrick Durusau @ 6:02 pm

In Looking for the stranger next door Bernard Vatant states what is probably a universal user requirement: Show me what I don’t know about subject X.

Bernard has some interesting ideas on how a system might try to meet that challenge. But for the details, see his post.

June 1, 2010

Enhancing navigation in biomedical databases by community voting and database-driven text classification

Enhancing navigation in biomedical databases by community voting and database-driven text classification demonstrates improvement of automatic classification of literature by harnessing community knowledge.

From the authors:

Using PepBank as a model database, we show how to build a classification-aided retrieval system that gathers training data from the community, is completely controlled by the database, scales well with concurrent change events, and can be adapted to add text classification capability to other biomedical databases.

The system can be seen at: PepBank.

You need to read the article in full to appreciate what the authors have done but a couple of quick points to notice:

1) The use of heat maps to assist users in determining the relevance of a given abstract. (Domain specific facts.)

2) The user interface allows yes/no voting on the same facts as appear in the heat map.

Voting results in reclassification of the entries.

Equally important is a user interface that enables immediate evaluation of relevance and, quick user feedback on relevance.

The user is not asked a series of questions, given complex rating choices, etc., it is yes or no. That may seem coarse but the project demonstrates with proper design, that can be very useful.

May 27, 2010

Heterogeneous Collaborations

Filed under: Interface Research/Design,Usability — Patrick Durusau @ 10:49 am

Knowledge sharing in heterogeneous collaborations – a longitudinal investigation of a cross-cultural research collaboration in nanoscience by Steffen Kanzler researches the impact of culture on sharing of knowledge.

The take away from this research project for topic maps is that “knowledge sharing” is far more complex than simply saying “share knowledge.”

The technical side of integrating multiple heterogeneous representatives of the same subjects is a worthy research goal.

However, the best topic map engine in the world isn’t very useful if people aren’t motivated to use it.

May 25, 2010

A Mapmaker’s Manifesto

Filed under: Maps,Search Engines,Search Interface,Searching,Subject Identity,Usability — Patrick Durusau @ 3:48 pm

Search Patterns by Peter Moreville and Jeffrey Callender should be on your must read list. Their “Mapmaker’s Manifesto” will give you an idea of why I like the book:

  1. Search is a problem too big to ignore.
  2. Browsing doesn’t scale, even on an IPhone.
  3. Size matters. Linear growth compels a step change in design.
  4. Simple, fast, and relevant are table stakes.
  5. One size won’t fit all. Search must adapt to context.
  6. Search in iterative, social, and multisensory.
  7. Increments aren’t enough. Even Google must innovate or die.
  8. It’s not just about findability. It’s not just about the Web.
  9. The challenge is radically multidisciplinary.
  10. We must engage engineers and executives in design.
  11. We can learn from the past. Library science is still relevant.
  12. We can learn from behavior. Interaction design affords actionable results.
  13. We can learn from one user. Analytics is enriched by ethnography.
  14. Some patterns, we should study and reuse.
  15. Some patterns, we should break like a bad habit.
  16. Search is a complex adaptive system.
  17. Emergence, cocreation, and self-organization are in play.
  18. To discover the seeds of change, go outside.
  19. In science, fiction, and search, the map invents the territory.
  20. The future isn’t just unwritten—it’s unsearched.

I also like Search Patterns because the authors’ concede there are vast unknowns as opposed to saying: “If you just use our (insert paradigm/syntax/ontology/language) then all those nasty problems go away.”

I think we need to accept their invitation to face the vast unknowns head on.

April 24, 2010

Usability at TMRA 2010?

Filed under: Conferences,Interface Research/Design,Topic Map Software,Usability — Patrick Durusau @ 6:58 pm

The success of topic maps depends upon having interfaces people will want to use.

Let’s request a one-day workshop on usability prior to TMRA 2010.

An overview of usability studies, techniques and literature. Might be a push in the right direction.

Perhaps a usability (HCI – human-computer interaction) track for TMRA 2011?

With case studies from topic map projects and usability researchers.

Impatient? See: HCI Bibliography : Human-Computer Interaction Resources, a collection of over 57,000 documents, plus recommended readings, link collections, etc.

April 22, 2010

A Blogging Lesson For Topic Maps?

Filed under: Interface Research/Design,Topic Map Software,Usability — Patrick Durusau @ 2:32 pm

As I was posting a blog entry for today, I thought about how blogging swept around the web. Unlike RDF and topic maps.

One difference between blogging and topic maps is that I can type a blog entry and post it.

I have an immediate feeling of accomplishment (whether I have accomplished anything or not).

And, what I have authored is immediately available for me and others to use.

Contrast that with the “hold your left foot in your right hand behind your back with your left eye closed, squinting through an inverted coke bottle while humming Zarathustra” theoretical discussions. (I am a co-author of the reference model so I think I am entitled.)

Or the “developers know best” cult that has shaped discussions to match the oddities and priorities of a developer view of the world.

An emphasis on giving users an immediate sense of accomplishment, with results they can use immediately could lead to a different adoption curve for topic maps.

Neither the theoretical nor developer perspectives on topic maps have had that emphasis.

A Missing Step?

I happened across a guide to study and writing research papers that I had as an undergraduate. Looking back over it, I noticed there is a step in the research process that is missing from search engines. Perhaps by design, perhaps not.

After choosing a topic, you did research, then in a variety of print resources to gather material for the paper. As you gathered it, you wrote down each piece of information on a note card along with the full bibliographic information for the source.

When you were writing a paper, you did not consult the original sources but rather your sub-set of those sources that were on your note cards.

In group research projects, we exchanged note cards so that everyone had access to the same sub-set of materials that we had found.

Bibliographic software mimics the note card based process but my question is why is that capacity missing from search interfaces?

That seems to be a missing step.  I don’t know if it is missing by design, i.e., it is cheaper to let everyone look for the same information over and over, or if it is missing in anticipation of bibliographic software filling the gap.

Search interfaces need to offer ways for us to preserve and share our research results with others.

Topic maps would be a good way to offer that sort of capability.

March 2, 2010

Skillful Semantic Users?

Filed under: Usability — Tags: , , , , — Patrick Durusau @ 9:05 am

I recently discovered one reason for my unease with semantic this and that technologies, including topic map interfaces. A friend mentioned to me that he wanted users to do more than enter subject names in their topic map interface. “Users need to also enter….”

The idea of users busily populating a semantic space is an attractive one, but it hasn’t been borne out in practice. So I don’t think my friend’s interface is going to prove to be useful, but why?

Then I got to thinking, how many indexers or librarians do I know? The sort of people whose talents combined together to bring us the Reader’s Guide to Periodic Literature and useful back of the book indexes. Due to my work in computer standards I know a lot of smart people but very few of them strike me as also being good at indexing or cataloging type skills.

Any semantic solution, RDFa, RDF/OWL, SUMO, Topic Maps, etc., will fail from an authoring standpoint due to a lack of skill. No technology can magically make users competent at the indexing or cataloging skills required to enable access by others.

Semantic interface writers need to recognize most users are simply consumers of information created by others. I would not be surprised if the ratio of producers to consumers is close to the ratio in open source projects between contributors and the consumers in those projects.

« Newer Posts

Powered by WordPress