Web 2.0, brugerinvolvering og sociale teknologier Lennart Björneborn Danmarks Biblioteksskole [email_address] KAF-kursus 2...
indhold <ul><li>Web 2.0 = ’participatory web’ </li></ul><ul><li>Web 2.0 = ’PIM’ + ’social media’ </li></ul><ul><li>Web 2.0...
<ul><li>New technologies alter the structure of our  interests :  the things we think  about .  </li></ul><ul><li>They alt...
” The Web, the Semantic Web, the Web 2.0, and Social Networks  are all manifestations of the success of the link.”   - Hyp...
”…  vi er på vej ind i linkenes tidsalder …  The Link Age  … Fremover vil man se links,  relationer , som mere fundamental...
‘ memex ’  = ’memory extender’ Vannevar Bush: ’As we may think’ The Atlantic Monthly, juli 1945 videnskabelig kreativitet ...
Ted Nelson, 1965 –  ’ hypertext’
’ Libraries of the Future’  (Licklider, 1963)   “et intermedie … der gennem et stik i væggen forbinder  maskinen med et vi...
<ul><li>“ power in arranging ideas in an unconstrained, weblike way” </li></ul><ul><ul><li>“…  decentralised, organic grow...
PIM + social media <ul><li>info.systemer til både personlig info.management (PIM) og verdensomspændende videndeling / sama...
PIM : Personal Info. Management Jones, William (2008).  Keeping Found Things Found:    The Study and Practice of Personal ...
fra PIM til ’WIM’ og derimellem <ul><li>redskaber til  Information Management (IM) </li></ul>Person Group Organization Soc...
Ericsson Medialab Internet =  computer -netværk
WWW =  dokument -netværk www.cybergeography.org/atlas/
Adamic et al.  (2003). A social network caught in the Web Web 2.0 =  person -netværk ” networked individualism ”  (Wellman...
web 2.0 = PIM + social media
<ul><li>Web 2.0 = “ participatory Web ” = “architecture of participation” </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Web 2.0 = bottom-up = “ us...
web 2.0 = social software <ul><li>”…  supports, extends, or derives added value  from human social behaviour …” Tom Coates...
<ul><li>“ 2.0”-tilgang  =  brugerskabte adfærdsspor og navigationsmuligheder </li></ul>
nyt brugerbegreb… <ul><li>deltagere i st.f. modtagere </li></ul><ul><li>medaktører </li></ul><ul><li>medskabere </li></ul>...
web 2.0 = <ul><li>= ’what’s in it for me?’  (PIM) </li></ul><ul><li>= ’that may help you too?’  (social media) </li></ul><...
<ul><li>’ networked individualism’   </li></ul><ul><li>   ’ collective intelligence’ </li></ul>web 2.0 :
(O’Reilly 2005)
www.wikimindmap.org
http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Image:HNL_Wiki_Wiki_Bus.jpg ’ wiki-wiki’  = ’super quick’  (Hawaii) wiki  = ’quick web’ ...
ISBN i Wikipedia
Jakob Voss :  http://wm.sieheauch.de
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Size_of_Wikipedia
’ blogometrics’ Adamic & Glance (2005). The Political Blogosphere and the 2004 U.S. Election.
blogpulse.com
del.icio.us ‘ social tagging’ /  ‘distributed classification’
citeulike.org
librarything.com
<ul><li>www.steve.museum   </li></ul><ul><li>social tagging in museums </li></ul><ul><li>art museums integrate folksonomie...
Millen et al. (2006). Dogear: social bookmarking in the enterprise [...]
web 2.0  = brugerskabte adfærdsspor <ul><li>” information traces” / ”social cues”  (Dieberger et al. 2000) </li></ul><ul><...
web 2.0 = social navigation   (via andres adfærdsspor) <ul><ul><li>’ social navigation’  (Dourish & Chalmers 1994) </li></...
web 2.0 = ’social hypertext’ <ul><li>websider + links = repræsentationer af mennesker + interesser </li></ul><ul><ul><li>E...
<ul><li>“ 2.0”  = udvidede ‘affordances’ for brugerskabte spor + social navigation </li></ul><ul><li>dvs. flere brugspoten...
personal traces and  social navigation in tag networks <ul><li>taggers </li></ul><ul><ul><li>(creators) </li></ul></ul><ul...
’ participation inequality’ <ul><li>” 90–9–1” regel  (Nielsen 2006) </li></ul><ul><ul><li>90% ’lurkers’ (’osere’) </li></u...
Business Week 11.6.07  www.businessweek.com/magazine/content/07_24/b4038405.htm
deltagelses- ’stien’ http://blogs.forrester.com/groundswell/2007/04/forresters_new_.html
<ul><li>“ awareness of others and their actions make us feel that the  space is alive  and might make it more  inviting ” ...
’ social affordances’ <ul><li>Wellman  et al. (2003). The social affordances of the Internet for networked individualism ....
<ul><li>Identity  - uniquely identifying people in the system  </li></ul><ul><li>Presence  - knowing who is online, availa...
Facebook
’ Homo Ludens’ / ’Creative Man’ <ul><li>Huizinga (1938).  ‘Homo Ludens’ </li></ul><ul><li>Institut for Fremtidsforskning (...
- spørgsmål? - kommentarer?
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in …5
×

Web 2.0, brugerinvolvering og sociale teknologier

1,062 views
930 views

Published on

Lennart Björneborn: præsentation på ph.d.-kursus ved KAF (Kulturarvens Forskerskole) 24.3.2009 på Danmarks Biblioteksskole

Published in: Education, Technology
0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total views
1,062
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
2
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
7
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

Web 2.0, brugerinvolvering og sociale teknologier

  1. 1. Web 2.0, brugerinvolvering og sociale teknologier Lennart Björneborn Danmarks Biblioteksskole [email_address] KAF-kursus 24-27.3.2009
  2. 2. indhold <ul><li>Web 2.0 = ’participatory web’ </li></ul><ul><li>Web 2.0 = ’PIM’ + ’social media’ </li></ul><ul><li>Web 2.0 = brugerskabte adfærdsspor + social navigation </li></ul><ul><ul><li>flere ’affordances’/brugspotentialer for at sætte spor og følge spor </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Web 2.0: sociale ’byggesten’ </li></ul><ul><li>Web 2.0 og Homo Ludens </li></ul><ul><ul><li>’ funability’ :-) </li></ul></ul>M.C. Escher: House of Stairs, 1951
  3. 3. <ul><li>New technologies alter the structure of our interests : the things we think about . </li></ul><ul><li>They alter the character of our symbols : the things we think with . </li></ul>Neil Postman, Technopoly , 1993
  4. 4. ” The Web, the Semantic Web, the Web 2.0, and Social Networks are all manifestations of the success of the link.” - Hypertext 2009 Conference: www.ht2009.org
  5. 5. ”… vi er på vej ind i linkenes tidsalder … The Link Age … Fremover vil man se links, relationer , som mere fundamentale.” - Nørretranders (2007). Civilisation 2.0 . s. 12
  6. 6. ‘ memex ’ = ’memory extender’ Vannevar Bush: ’As we may think’ The Atlantic Monthly, juli 1945 videnskabelig kreativitet hæmmes fordi indekseringsmetoder ikke støtter forbindelser på tværs af klassifikationshierarkier ‘ trails ’ = hyperlinks, relationer mellem tekster – svarende til associationer i hjernen (Bush)
  7. 7. Ted Nelson, 1965 – ’ hypertext’
  8. 8. ’ Libraries of the Future’ (Licklider, 1963) “et intermedie … der gennem et stik i væggen forbinder maskinen med et vidensunderstøttende offentligt netværk” <ul><li>- computere bruges til kommunikation + samarbejde = relationer </li></ul><ul><ul><li>- jf. Douglas Engelbart: human + social augmentation </li></ul></ul>
  9. 9. <ul><li>“ power in arranging ideas in an unconstrained, weblike way” </li></ul><ul><ul><li>“… decentralised, organic growth of ideas, technology, and society. … allows us to grow faster than we ever could when we were fettered by the hierarchical classification systems into which we bound ourselves” </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Berners-Lee (1999). Weaving the Web . </li></ul></ul>Tim Berners-Lee CERN, 1989/1990 WWW = Internet + hypertext
  10. 10. PIM + social media <ul><li>info.systemer til både personlig info.management (PIM) og verdensomspændende videndeling / samarbejde </li></ul>
  11. 11. PIM : Personal Info. Management Jones, William (2008). Keeping Found Things Found: The Study and Practice of Personal Information Management.
  12. 12. fra PIM til ’WIM’ og derimellem <ul><li>redskaber til Information Management (IM) </li></ul>Person Group Organization Society World P G O S W ’ OIM’ fx: CERN intranet ’ WIM’ fx: WWW ’ SIM’ fx: bibliotek.dk PIM fx: Bush ’Memex’ GIM fx: fællesmail © Björneborn WWW: P IM /G IM  O IM  W IM  L IM /S IM L Localization ’ LIM’ fx: wiki for byen Davis, Calif.
  13. 13. Ericsson Medialab Internet = computer -netværk
  14. 14. WWW = dokument -netværk www.cybergeography.org/atlas/
  15. 15. Adamic et al. (2003). A social network caught in the Web Web 2.0 = person -netværk ” networked individualism ” (Wellmann et al. 2003)
  16. 16. web 2.0 = PIM + social media
  17. 17. <ul><li>Web 2.0 = “ participatory Web ” = “architecture of participation” </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Web 2.0 = bottom-up = “ user-added value” </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Web 2.0 = buzzword: Tim O’Reilly 2004 </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Web 2.0 = connect + create + collaborate + share + remix + .. </li></ul><ul><ul><li>interpersonelle, sociale medier til interaktion, videndeling, samarbejde </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>blogs, RSS, wikis, tagging, folksonomier, sociale netværkssteder, mm. </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Web 2.0 = Web “0.0” = Tim Berners-Lee’s idé med WWW 1989/1990 </li></ul><ul><ul><li>redskaber til videndeling og samarbejde </li></ul></ul>
  18. 18. web 2.0 = social software <ul><li>”… supports, extends, or derives added value from human social behaviour …” Tom Coates’ blog: www.plasticbag.org/archives/2005/01/an_addendum_to_a_definition_of _social_software </li></ul>
  19. 19. <ul><li>“ 2.0”-tilgang = brugerskabte adfærdsspor og navigationsmuligheder </li></ul>
  20. 20. nyt brugerbegreb… <ul><li>deltagere i st.f. modtagere </li></ul><ul><li>medaktører </li></ul><ul><li>medskabere </li></ul><ul><li>producenter + formidlere + konsumenter </li></ul><ul><li>informationsarkitekter </li></ul><ul><li>… ? </li></ul>
  21. 21. web 2.0 = <ul><li>= ’what’s in it for me?’ (PIM) </li></ul><ul><li>= ’that may help you too?’ (social media) </li></ul><ul><li>= egoisme til fælles gavn :-) (Web 2.0 = PIM + social media) </li></ul>+ Me = Us
  22. 22. <ul><li>’ networked individualism’ </li></ul><ul><li> ’ collective intelligence’ </li></ul>web 2.0 :
  23. 23. (O’Reilly 2005)
  24. 24. www.wikimindmap.org
  25. 25. http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Image:HNL_Wiki_Wiki_Bus.jpg ’ wiki-wiki’ = ’super quick’ (Hawaii) wiki = ’quick web’ – startet 1995
  26. 26. ISBN i Wikipedia
  27. 27. Jakob Voss : http://wm.sieheauch.de
  28. 28. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Size_of_Wikipedia
  29. 29. ’ blogometrics’ Adamic & Glance (2005). The Political Blogosphere and the 2004 U.S. Election.
  30. 30. blogpulse.com
  31. 31. del.icio.us ‘ social tagging’ / ‘distributed classification’
  32. 32. citeulike.org
  33. 33. librarything.com
  34. 34. <ul><li>www.steve.museum </li></ul><ul><li>social tagging in museums </li></ul><ul><li>art museums integrate folksonomies into museum webs </li></ul><ul><li>visitors add subject tags to museum online collections </li></ul><ul><li>“ use folksonomic classification to improve access” </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Trant et al. (2006). Exploring the potential for social tagging and folksonomy in art museums. </li></ul></ul>
  35. 35. Millen et al. (2006). Dogear: social bookmarking in the enterprise [...]
  36. 36. web 2.0 = brugerskabte adfærdsspor <ul><li>” information traces” / ”social cues” (Dieberger et al. 2000) </li></ul><ul><ul><li>adfærdsspor = tags, kommentarer, rating (+ alle andre web 2.0-ting) </li></ul></ul><ul><li>“ read wear” / “edit wear” (Hill et al. 1992) </li></ul><ul><ul><li>‘ wear’ = brug, slid </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>‘ read wear’: fx ‘æselører’ (‘dog-ears’ :-) </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>‘ edit wear’: fx wikis </li></ul></ul>IBM Dogear = intranet 2.0 jf. Bush (1945): ’trails’
  37. 37. web 2.0 = social navigation (via andres adfærdsspor) <ul><ul><li>’ social navigation’ (Dourish & Chalmers 1994) </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Dourish & Chalmers (1994). Running out of space: models of information navigation. Proc. of HCI'94 . www.dcs.gla.ac.uk/~matthew/papers/hci94.pdf </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><li>“ moving through an information space and exploiting the activities and orientations of others in that space” (Dourish 2003) </li></ul><ul><li>to fundamentale aspekter ved social navigation: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>” presence of multiple individuals within some space” </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>” communication of aspects of their activity to each other” </li></ul></ul><ul><li> (Dourish 2003) </li></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Dourish (2003). Where the footprints lead: tracking down other roles for social navigation. pp. 273-291. In: Höök, K. et al. (eds.). Designing Information Spaces: the Social Navigation Approach . Springer-Verlag </li></ul></ul></ul>
  38. 38. web 2.0 = ’social hypertext’ <ul><li>websider + links = repræsentationer af mennesker + interesser </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Erickson (1996). The World Wide Web as social hypertext. </li></ul></ul><ul><li>social navigation / søgestrategi baseret på vores sociale viden: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>find en, der ved noget, eller find en, der kender en, der ved noget </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Web 2.0 = social hypertext </li></ul><ul><ul><li>interpersonelle, sociale medier til interaktion, samarbejde og videndeling </li></ul></ul>
  39. 39. <ul><li>“ 2.0” = udvidede ‘affordances’ for brugerskabte spor + social navigation </li></ul><ul><li>dvs. flere brugspotentialer for at sætte egne spor og følge andres spor </li></ul>
  40. 40. personal traces and social navigation in tag networks <ul><li>taggers </li></ul><ul><ul><li>(creators) </li></ul></ul><ul><li>tags (concepts) </li></ul><ul><li>taggees (instances) </li></ul>© Björneborn ’ multi-reachability’ = many different paths from one node to another = ’small-world’ distances  serendipity nnn nnn nnn nnn nnn nnn nnn nnn nnn nnn
  41. 41. ’ participation inequality’ <ul><li>” 90–9–1” regel (Nielsen 2006) </li></ul><ul><ul><li>90% ’lurkers’ (’osere’) </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>9% sporadiske bidragydere </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>1% hyperaktive bidragydere </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>blogs = 95–5–0,1 </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>wikipedia = 99,8–0,2–0,003 </li></ul></ul><ul><li>” legitimate peripheral participation” (Lave & Wenger 1990) </li></ul><ul><ul><li>ok at være ’lurker’ </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>’ lurkers’ observer, imiterer, afprøver, lærer = socialiseres ind i praksisfællesskab (jf. Hemetsberger & Reinhardt 2004) </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>’ learning by participating’ </li></ul></ul>www.useit.com/alertbox/participation_inequality.html
  42. 42. Business Week 11.6.07 www.businessweek.com/magazine/content/07_24/b4038405.htm
  43. 43. deltagelses- ’stien’ http://blogs.forrester.com/groundswell/2007/04/forresters_new_.html
  44. 44. <ul><li>“ awareness of others and their actions make us feel that the space is alive and might make it more inviting ” </li></ul><ul><ul><li>” social presence” + ” populated space” </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>(Dieberger et al. 2000) </li></ul></ul></ul>
  45. 45. ’ social affordances’ <ul><li>Wellman et al. (2003). The social affordances of the Internet for networked individualism . </li></ul>(Smith 2007) (Adamic 2003)
  46. 46. <ul><li>Identity - uniquely identifying people in the system </li></ul><ul><li>Presence - knowing who is online, available or otherwise nearby </li></ul><ul><li>Relationships - describing how two users in the system are related </li></ul><ul><li>Conversations - talking to other people through the system </li></ul><ul><li>Groups - forming communities of interest </li></ul><ul><li>Reputation - knowing the status of other people in the system - who can be trusted? </li></ul><ul><li>Sharing - sharing things that are meaningful to participants </li></ul>‘ Social Software Building Blocks’ (Smith 2007) http://nform.ca/publications/social-software-building-block jf. ‘sociability’ (Preece 2001)
  47. 47. Facebook
  48. 48. ’ Homo Ludens’ / ’Creative Man’ <ul><li>Huizinga (1938). ‘Homo Ludens’ </li></ul><ul><li>Institut for Fremtidsforskning (2004). ‘Creative Man’ </li></ul><ul><li>jf. ‘funability’ / ‘funology’ </li></ul><ul><ul><li>fx Blythe et al. (2003) </li></ul></ul><ul><li>jf. web 2.0 </li></ul><ul><ul><li>fx Spalding, Tim (2006). Is your OPAC fun? (a manifesto of sorts). </li></ul></ul>http://www.librarything.com/thingology/2006/12/is-your- opac-fun-manifesto-of-sorts.php
  49. 49. - spørgsmål? - kommentarer?

×