Tagging from personal to social
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×

Like this? Share it with your network

Share

Tagging from personal to social

  • 13,649 views
Uploaded on

This is for a keynote I gave at WWW 06 in Edinburgh

This is for a keynote I gave at WWW 06 in Edinburgh

  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
  • Know my company, House Designer!

    +55 (13) 3011-9314
    +55 (13) 3219-6347
    housedesignerpromotions@gmail.com
    comercial@housedesigner.com.br

    Twitter: @HouseDesigne

    Fábrica: Rua Visconde de Vergueiro 20, Centro - Santos - SP - Brazil
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
  • A great over view Rashmi!
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
No Downloads

Views

Total Views
13,649
On Slideshare
7,067
From Embeds
6,582
Number of Embeds
10

Actions

Shares
Downloads
211
Comments
2
Likes
23

Embeds 6,582

http://rashmisinha.com 6,530
http://localhost 30
url_unknown 7
http://localhost:8083 5
http://translate.googleusercontent.com 4
http://www.slideshare.net 2
http://192.168.33.10:3000 1
http://webcache.googleusercontent.com 1
http://www.yokway.com:9080 1
http://xmlgrid.net 1

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
    No notes for slide

Transcript

  • 1. Tagging – From Personal to Social: Some Observations & Design Principles Rashmi Sinha Uzanto
  • 2. Structure of Talk
    • My Perspective
    • Tagging on a Personal Level
      • Compared to categorization
    • Social Systems formed by Tagging
    • Tagging & Wisdom of Crowds
    • Some weaknesses
    • 9 Design Principles
  • 3. Cognition in the wild
    • Cognitive Anthropology: Understanding culture by understanding cognition
    • Two main methods
      • Pile Sorting
      • Freelisting
  • 4. Free-listing
    • Goals
      • Explore boundaries & scope of domain
      • Capture cultural consensus
      • Gain familiarity with user vocabulary
    • Strengths
      • Simplicity
      • Flexibility
        • Conducted as part of interview, or as written exercise
      • “ Name all the x's you know.”
  • 5. Digital Categorization Multiple concepts activated Choose ONE of the activated concepts. Categorize it! Object worth remembering (article, image…) Analysis-Paralysis!
    • Analysis Paralysis
    • Balancing your scheme
    • Over time – category boundaries change, labels obsolete
  • 6.
    • Cannot place in more than one place
    • Disappears from view
    • Mistakes are costly
  • 7. Tagging is simpler Multiple concepts are activated Tag it! Note all concepts Object worth remembering (article, image…)
    • Goal is to categorize
    • Maps to cognitive process
    • Reduced load
    • Fun, Self-feedback, social feedback
    • Less balancing of scheme
  • 8. Tagging still leads to anxiety
    • Differs from person to person
      • And by domain
    • Solution not simpler input process (though that could help)
      • Confidence in finding
  • 9. Some hypothesis
    • Tagging takes lesser time than categorizing
      • Users generate tags/categorize for new emails / bookmarks
      • Measure : Time to categorize compared to time for 1 OR 2 OR 3 tags
    • Categories are more memorable than a tag
      • Give users 30 secs. per item to generate tag OR categorize
      • Measure : Recall of tag / category after a week
    • Comparing different types of tags
      • Personal tags are more memorable than Semantic ones
        • Measure : Tag recall after a week
      • Semantic tags are generated first
        • Measure : Order of Semantic and Personal tag generation
  • 10. Hypothesis (cont)
    • Hierarchy & non-exclusivity
      • Compare time taken
      • Recall
      • Difficulty
    (D) Categorization (C) Flat Categorization Exclusive (B) Hierarchical Tagging (A) Tagging Non-Exclusive Hierarchical Flat
  • 11. The Personal to the Social
  • 12. Browsing alone
  • 13. Along together
    • Alone together (Ducheneaut et al. CHI 2006)
      • Passive presence of others
      • Playing for the audience but not necessarily interacting
    • Social facilitation (Zajonc, 1960)
      • Improvement in performance in presence of others
      • Presence does not need to be active
      • Observed even in cockroaches!
  • 14. Tagging as second generation social network
    • Actually useful!
    • Lots of weak ties (Granovetter: The strength of weak ties )
      • Social networks emphasize strong ties (lists of contacts, friendship ratings)
    • Objects (tags) mediate social relationships
      • Objects are reasons people affiliate with each other
      • Provide context for relationship. Means for new relationships.
      • Theory: Object centered sociality (sociologist Karin Knorr Cetina)
    • Application: Interest based groups
      • Collaborative Tagging & Expertise in the Enterprise (John & Seligman)
      • Fringe Contacts: People Tagging for the Enterprise (Ferrell & Lau)
  • 15. Tagging and Wisdom of Crowds
    • Cognitive Diversity
    • Independence
    • Decentralization
    • Easy Aggregation
  • 16. 1. Cognitive Diversity
    • Need many perspectives for good answers
    • Groups become homogenous
      • Members bring less and less new information in
      • Varying levels of insight & knowledge provide good mix
        • Better than everyone having a lot of knowledge!
    • Diversity reduces groupthink
      • Groupthink works by shielding members from outside opinions
      • Rationalize away counterarguments
    • Diversity reduces conformity
      • Chance that you will change opinion to match group
  • 17. 2. Independence
    • Keeps people’s mistakes from getting correlated (uncorrelated mistakes averaged out)
    • Encourages people to bring in new viewpoints (diversity)
    • Concept of Social Proof
      • Milgram experiment
      • People assume that groups know what they are doing
      • Assuming crowd is wise, leads to herd like behavior
        • Can sometimes lead to good decisions
  • 18. 2. Independence (cont.)
    • Information Cascades
      • Sequence of uninformed choices, building upon each other
        • Example: Thai & Indian restaurant
        • Information is imperfect – sometimes incorrect, sometimes correct
        • Decisions made in sequence
          • Everyone relies on own information
          • And what everyone else is doing
          • Wrong information propagates down in a chain
      • Ideal when people make decision relying on private information
        • Compare Del.icio.us & digg
      • Information Cascades can be good
        • Example: Iowa farmers decision about hybrid corn
  • 19. Imitation & Suggestion
    • Intelligent & mindless imitation
      • Human beings are imitation machines
      • Imitation is a good thing
        • Bad when you don’t reply on private information
        • And don’t make independent judgment
          • Example: Japanese macaques learning to separate wheat from stones
      • Build some method to let people evaluate tag suggestions
    • Imitation & Suggestion in Tagging Systems
      • Lazy Sheep bookmarklet
      • Google Suggest approach
      • Towards the Semantic Web: Collaborative Tag Suggestions (Xu et al.)
      • Implicit Tagging using Donated Bookmarks (Markines, et al.)
  • 20. 3. Decentralization
    • Encourages independence
    • Takes advantage of tacit knowledge
      • People have specialized knowledge that might not be communicable to right person in centralized structure
      • Problems: Valuable information uncovered in one part of the system does not get communicated to another part
        • Need some type of loose coordination
    “ A crowd of decentralized people working to solve a problem on their own without any central effort to guide them, come up with better solutions, rather than a top-down driven solution.” Suroweicki
  • 21. 4. Easy Aggregation
    • A decentralized system can pick right solution
      • With easy way for information to be aggregated across system
    • Example: Francis Galton
      • A crowd of people made independent decisions
      • He added the votes
  • 22. Some Weaknesses of tag-based Social Systems
  • 23. 1. Tag Specificity, Expertise & Perspective
    • Shirky example: Dewey Decimals categorization of world religions
    • What about Flickr?
      • Hinduism: 6512 photos
      • Christianity: 5207 photos
  • 24. Tagging systems are better, but…
    • Tagging systems represent people who participate in them
      • Their viewpoints & perspective
    • Types of biases
      • In-groups might use more specific tags than Out-groups
      • Experts might use more specific tags than novices
  • 25. 2. No easy way to show minority viewpoint
    • Consensus viewpoint bubbles up
      • How to give alternative viewpoints a voice?
    • Example: Catholic Church recognizes Devil’s advocate
  • 26. 3. Why Amazon tags did not work
    • No clear articulation of benefits
    • Mixed with other, more common participation methods
    • Busy interface
    • No organic growth (seeding with select few)
  • 27.
    • Too many options?
  • 28. 4. Adoption by Average User
    • Tag navigation does not suit user task?
    • Users do not understand its for navigation?
  • 29. Design Principles for Tagging Systems
  • 30. #1: Make System Personally Useful
    • For end-user system should have strong personal use
      • Memorable Personal Snippets (e.g., Del.icio.us & Flickr)
      • Self-expression (e.g., Newsvine)
      • My expertise or interests (RawSugar)
    • Don’t count on altruism
      • System should thrive on people’s selfishness
      • Incent the behavior you want
    • Clearly communicate benefits to users
      • Create a positive reinforcement cycle
  • 31. del.icio.us Useful before Saving First Link
  • 32. #2:Identify Symbiotic Relationship Between Personal & Social
    • Individual participation in system should naturally aggregate into social stream
      • What personal snippets do people like to share?
      • Personal snippets > Social stream
        • Example
          • Pictures > Organized by Events
          • Music > Organized by Playlists
  • 33. #3: Make Porous Boundary Between Public & Private
    • Earlier systems
      • Personal (Personal Desktop Software, e.g., Picasa, EndNote)
      • OR Social websites (Shutterfly)
    • Rethink public & private
      • People will share for the right returns
      • Set defaults to public, allow easy change to private
        • Provide clear benefit of sharing
    • Give user control
        • Over individual pieces & sets
        • Delete items from history
        • Reset /remove profile
    Privacy settings on Flickr
  • 34. #4: Provide Outlet for Self-expression
    • Creative self-expression
      • Artistic expression (Flickr, YouTube)
      • Humor (YouTube)
    • Individual piece should be small
      • Can create sets & lists
      • Do Mashups
      • Simple, guessable URLs for everything
    • Leave room for games & social play
      • Appreciation
      • Stalking (some!)
      • Gossip
    Writers on Newsvine
  • 35. #4a. Allow for Different Types of Participation
    • Social sites don’t require 100% active participation
      • Implicit creation (creating by consuming)
      • Remixing—adding value to others’ content
    Source: Bradley Horowitz’s weblog, Elatable, Feb. 17, 2006, “Creators, Synthesizers, and Consumers”
  • 36. #4b. How to Encourage Participation
    • Insights from Social Psychology research
      • Highlight unique contribution
      • Allow for smaller local groups
      • Highlight benefit to self from participation
      • Highlight benefit to group
    Source: Using social psychology to motivate contributions to online communities, Ling et al. 2005
  • 37. #5. Provide Scent of Others in the System
    • What paths are well worn, what are not
    • User profiles / photos
    • Real-time updating
      • Feels like a conversation
      • sense that others are out there
    What people are digging right now!
  • 38. #6. And yet, Moments of Independence
    • Choreography: when alone, when part of group
    • Prevent mobs, optimize “wisdom of crowds”
    • Don’t make it too easy to mimic others
      • Incentives for originality & uniqueness
  • 39. #7. Enable Serendipity
    • Don’t make navigation all about popularity
      • Access to some popular stuff (keep this fast moving)
    • Make the “long tail” accessible
      • Use popularity as a jump off point to other ways of exploring
    • Provide personalization
      • Recommendations using collaborative filtering
        • Similar tags, content, others
    • Ad-hoc groups?
  • 40. #8. Allow for alternative viewpoints & perspectives
    • Tags bias perspective in specific manner
      • People of a group know more
        • Likely to use more specific tags
        • Hence less exposure (no hierarchy)
      • Similar problem for experts
  • 41. #9. Keep input simple. Solve problems with good findability
    • Tagging shows success of simplicity
      • Don't’ increase cognitive cost of tagging
    • Tagging systems can support different types of findability
      • Some metaphors
  • 42. #9a. User Experience for Faceted Browse Interfaces
    • User is in control
    • Every movement (forward, making a turn) is a conscious choice
      • System should provide information at every step
    • If user makes mistakes, she can go back or start again
    Like driving a car…
  • 43. #9b. User Experience with Recommender Systems
    • User has less control over specifics of interaction
    • System does not provide information about specifics of action
    • More of a “black box” model (some input from user, output from systems)
    Like riding a roller coaster…
  • 44. User Experience with Browsing Tagging Systems
    • Pivot Browsing
      • Move at a slower pace
      • Get the lay of the land, directly experience surroundings
      • Change paths when you want
      • Choose paths based on what looks promising, how well worn, what signs say
    Like a hike in the woods
  • 45. You can do all three with tags
    • Faceted Systems from Tags
      • Inducing Ontology from Flickr, Schmitz
    • Collaborative Filtering from Tags
      • Automatic Tag Clustering, Begelman, Keller & Smajda
    • Pivot Browsing on Tagging Systems
      • Tag-Based Navigation for Peer-to-Peer Wikipedia, Fokker et al.
  • 46. Parting thoughts
    • Tagging is in the eyes of the tagger
      • Can implicit tagging be tagging?
    • Tagging by others is more useful than tagging by self
      • Is tagging about harnessing consensus or personal perspective?
    • Will Categorization will be back?
      • Better interface
      • Non-exclusive
  • 47.
    • Questions?
    • [email_address]
    • URLs
    • www.uzanto.com
    • www.rashmisinha.com
  • 48.
    • “In essence tag systems mirror the pagerank structure of Google's system, but make the internal structures browsable and viewable directly.”
      • Lee Iverson