Thinking patterns of users during content tagging in social media sites
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×
 

Thinking patterns of users during content tagging in social media sites

on

  • 388 views

Presentation about a pilot study done as a part of qualitative research studies

Presentation about a pilot study done as a part of qualitative research studies

Statistics

Views

Total Views
388
Views on SlideShare
385
Embed Views
3

Actions

Likes
0
Downloads
0
Comments
0

1 Embed 3

https://twitter.com 3

Accessibility

Categories

Upload Details

Uploaded via as Microsoft PowerPoint

Usage Rights

© All Rights Reserved

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
    Processing…
Post Comment
Edit your comment

    Thinking patterns of users during content tagging in social media sites Thinking patterns of users during content tagging in social media sites Presentation Transcript

    • Thinking Patterns of Users during Content Tagging in Social Media Sites Pilot Study Place logo or logotype here, otherwise delete this.Aravind Sesagiri Raamkumar
    • Non-Textual TaggingAgendaResearch objectivesSignificance of the research Textual TaggingProposed methodologyFieldworkInitial findings
    • Research Objectives Explore key themes that characterize the thought process of users duringcontent tagging in social media sites To use qualitative research methods to validate the key findings ofquantitative & other research studies on tagging behavior:- Tagging motivations vary across different tagging systems  Majority of users tend to be categorizers than describers  Tagging system enhancements (ex: Tag Recommenders) have a significant impact on user’s tagging behavior (Strohmaier, 2009) Categorizer or Describer? Public use or Personal use? Consistent or Inconsistent? Formal vs. Informal?
    • a small but important note… Tagging in FB with person and place names is not free-text tagging!
    • Significance of the ResearchSupposedly, first of its kind in qualitative research studiesFinding out new themes hitherto unattained by other research methodologiesUnderstanding the literacy level of users on the topic of content tagging So as to emphasize the need for educationProviding an entry point for ontology extraction from folksonomies
    • Methodology • Researcher motivations – related to core research areas Build-up (Folksonomy and Ontologies) to topic • Brief idea of a potential topic selection • Survey of literature within discipline Literature • In this case, it was outside the discipline Review • Arriving at the research objectives of the topic in hand Framing the topic Participant • Validating the applicability of different research approaches observation Approach • Selection of the appropriate approach - Mixed methods selection • Selecting sampling method - Convenience! Sampling • Questions for the interview based on research objectives Tagging Interview and • Selection of content for tagging exercise Exercise Questions For tagging exercise, certain resources (content) selected on the potential of evoking multiple interpretations • Images and web pages used for the exercise can be got from this link
    • Fieldwork Two pilot interviews within this pilot study • To evaluate the appropriateness of interview questions • To evaluate the effectiveness of the tagging exercise • To determine the flow of activities Initial set of Tagging 2nd set of Analyzing user Last set of questions exercise questions assigned tags questions Interviews and tagging exercise conducted in natural settings Semi-structured Interviews conducted in native language Transcription process and analysis • Major issues and categories (themes) identified from each transcription immediately after each interview – concurrent interviewing and analysis
    • Initial Findings Main Themes Users have a natural desire to describe non-textual content rather than textual content -> Hence can’t say users tend to be categorizers than describers in general, but… Users’ tagging behavior consciously changes based on content type and not based on the system -> Tagging behavior change across systems is an implication! Users natural flow of thought is affected by tag enhancement features -> Perhaps, slight UI changes needed Users’ (lack of ) understanding of the entire tagging lifecycle is clearly seen in their perception of the whole process -> Most users (at least Asians) are in need of education Users think to add tags mainly for public usage and not for personal usage -> Goes with the expectations of tagging as an activityAverage of three to four tags added per resource - As Tagging as an activity doesn’t seem to demand persuasion! per NORM
    • Issues & NotesUnsaturated potential themes Users’ tagging behavior is (in)dependant [of/on] personal life experiences Users’ tagging behavior changes from casual to formal in professional environmentsIssues Observation is an inappropriate method for this topic Tagging is an activity that normally demands very less attention from users in real word settings =>High probability of showcasing idealistic behavior during tagging exercise Lack of a representative sample Volume of content (ex: images) tagged, determines the validity of theme 1 High Categorization behavior Retort to theme 2 => Low High Volume of images uploaded
    • Future WorkA case study approach concentrating on a group of users (perhaps pilot users for a newtagging based system) could be employed during the Requirements phaseContent analysis and questionnaires are the appropriate methods for analyzing largesamples (n=1000+) along with a few personal interviews – TriangulationNon-English social media sites could be brought into the purview
    • Thank You Q&A