Sausages, coffee, chicken and the  web: Establishing new trust metrics  for scholarly communication <ul><li>Eduserv Founda...
symposium  |simˈpōzēəm| noun ( pl.  -sia  |-zēə|  or  -siums  ) a conference or meeting to discuss a particular subject. •...
 
~
Internet Trust
“ Internet Trust Anti-Pattern” <ul><li>System is started by self-selecting core of high-trust technologists (or specialist...
Trust: The Internet User Problem <ul><li>Subjected to: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Spam </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Viruses/Troja...
Trust: The Publisher Problem <ul><li>Value proposition being questioned: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Distribution </li></ul></ul...
Trust: The Librarian Problem <ul><li>Value proposition being questioned: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Ownership v.s. Access </li>...
Publisher: Icon Books ISBN: 184046531X
Doesn’t scale Increases systemic risk Local Global <ul><li>Through personal acquaintance </li></ul><ul><li>Sometimes Trans...
Not enforceable Subject to abuse Horizontal Vertical <ul><li>Amongst equals </li></ul><ul><li>Little possibility of coerci...
Internet Trust v.s. Scholarly Trust Vertical Horizontal Local Global Internet Trust Scholarly Trust
Avoiding the Internet Trust Anti-Pattern
 
The Connection? <ul><li>Their success is largely attributable to their early adoption of simple “trust metrics” </li></ul>...
The Problems? <ul><li>Trust metrics restricted to their particular site. </li></ul><ul><li>Trust metric context is still p...
Web 2.0 is about trust
 
 
 
Implications <ul><li>What person X is blogging </li></ul><ul><li>What person X is bookmarking- on several social bookmarki...
 
Implications (Academic) <ul><li>See the realtime annotated bibliography of Dr. W </li></ul><ul><li>Show all the ways in wh...
 
But Web 2.0 is the problem too...
 
 
 
 
Average Articles Read  per year per University Faculty Member *280 with outliers Figure from  www.dlib.org/dlib/october03/...
Average Minutes per Article by University  Faculty Member Average Minutes Per Article Figure from  www.dlib.org/dlib/octob...
Paucity of heuristics
We proto-librarians are informed with much fanfare   in library school that librarians have a better sense for   “ source ...
We publishers will talk with much fanfare   to anyone who will listen that publishers have a better sense for   “source au...
http://www.laspositascollege.edu/library/magazines_journals.php
Susan E. Beck  Collection Development Coordinator  New Mexico State University Library http://lib.nmsu.edu/instruction/eva...
~ www.brown.edu/~gbilder/history/index.html www.brown.edu/history/index.html
.gov .edu .org .com
https
http://www.foo.com
 
Citation source pioneer credit leads eponym Background FutureWork Refutation Support Methodology  Data Generalize Speciali...
nature nike pepsi apple
We want to know
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Industry Precedents
 
 
 
 
The publishing process is invisible
 
 
 
Early Modern Internet
 
 
 
 
[email_address]
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in …5
×

Sausages, coffee, chicken and the web: Establishing new trust metrics for scholarly communication

4,217 views

Published on

A presentation by Geoffrey Bilder of CrossRef at the Eduserv Foundation Symposium 2008.

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

No Downloads
Views
Total views
4,217
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
49
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
41
Comments
0
Likes
3
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide
  • Sausages, coffee, chicken and the web: Establishing new trust metrics for scholarly communication

    1. 2. Sausages, coffee, chicken and the web: Establishing new trust metrics for scholarly communication <ul><li>Eduserv Foundation Symposium 2008 </li></ul>Geoffrey Bilder Director of Strategic Initiatives
    2. 3. symposium |simˈpōzēəm| noun ( pl. -sia |-zēə| or -siums ) a conference or meeting to discuss a particular subject. • a collection of essays or papers on a particular subject by a number of contributors. • a drinking party or convivial discussion, esp. as held in ancient Greece after a banquet (and notable as the title of a work by Plato). ORIGIN late 16th cent. (denoting a drinking party): via Latin from Greek sumposion , from sumpotēs ‘fellow drinker,’ from sun- ‘together’ + potēs ‘drinker.’
    3. 5. ~
    4. 6. Internet Trust
    5. 7. “ Internet Trust Anti-Pattern” <ul><li>System is started by self-selecting core of high-trust technologists (or specialists of some sort) </li></ul><ul><li>System is touted as authority-less, non-hierarchical, etc.- But this is not true (see A) </li></ul><ul><li>The unwashed masses start using the system. </li></ul><ul><li>The system nearly breaks under the strain of untrustworthy users. </li></ul><ul><li>Regulatory systems are put into place in order to restore order. Sometimes they are automated, sometimes not. </li></ul><ul><li>System is again touted as authority-less, non-hierarchical, etc. But this is not true (see E). </li></ul>
    6. 8. Trust: The Internet User Problem <ul><li>Subjected to: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Spam </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Viruses/Trojans </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Phishing </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Urban myths </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Dodgy content </li></ul></ul><ul><li>And they don’t realize that they have a general trust problem! </li></ul>Yet.
    7. 9. Trust: The Publisher Problem <ul><li>Value proposition being questioned: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Distribution </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Sales/Marketing </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Editorial//Production </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Accused of profiteering </li></ul><ul><li>Content comparatively hidden </li></ul><ul><li>Brand increasingly hidden </li></ul><ul><li>Deprecation of intermediaries (”stovepiping”) </li></ul>
    8. 10. Trust: The Librarian Problem <ul><li>Value proposition being questioned: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Ownership v.s. Access </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Organization, Categorization </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Curation, Preservation </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Awareness, Outreach </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Content comparatively hidden </li></ul><ul><li>Brand increasingly hidden </li></ul><ul><li>Deprecation of intermediaries (”stovepiping”) </li></ul>
    9. 11. Publisher: Icon Books ISBN: 184046531X
    10. 12. Doesn’t scale Increases systemic risk Local Global <ul><li>Through personal acquaintance </li></ul><ul><li>Sometimes Transitive </li></ul><ul><li>Extends trust through proxy </li></ul><ul><li>Proxy transitively extends trust to “strangers” </li></ul>
    11. 13. Not enforceable Subject to abuse Horizontal Vertical <ul><li>Amongst equals </li></ul><ul><li>Little possibility of coercion </li></ul><ul><li>Within hierarchy (possibly through deference) </li></ul><ul><li>Coercion can be used to enforce behavior </li></ul>
    12. 14. Internet Trust v.s. Scholarly Trust Vertical Horizontal Local Global Internet Trust Scholarly Trust
    13. 15. Avoiding the Internet Trust Anti-Pattern
    14. 17. The Connection? <ul><li>Their success is largely attributable to their early adoption of simple “trust metrics” </li></ul><ul><li>Based on user-provided “stealth metadata” </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Volunteered </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Inferred </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Resulting in a built-in “social feedback loop”. </li></ul>
    15. 18. The Problems? <ul><li>Trust metrics restricted to their particular site. </li></ul><ul><li>Trust metric context is still primitive. </li></ul>
    16. 19. Web 2.0 is about trust
    17. 23. Implications <ul><li>What person X is blogging </li></ul><ul><li>What person X is bookmarking- on several social bookmarking sites (e.g. del.isio.us, Connotea) </li></ul><ul><li>What person X is listening to (e.g. Last.FM) </li></ul><ul><li>What person X is taking pictures of (e.g. Flickr) </li></ul><ul><li>What person X's travel schedule is (e.g. iCal) </li></ul><ul><li>What books X is reading or planning on reading (e.g. Amazon wish lists) </li></ul>
    18. 25. Implications (Academic) <ul><li>See the realtime annotated bibliography of Dr. W </li></ul><ul><li>Show all the ways in which people that you trust have categorized resource X </li></ul><ul><li>See how your taxonomy compares to the taxonomy of Dr. Y </li></ul><ul><li>See all the resources that your research group is categorizing as Z </li></ul>
    19. 27. But Web 2.0 is the problem too...
    20. 32. Average Articles Read per year per University Faculty Member *280 with outliers Figure from www.dlib.org/dlib/october03/king/10king.html
    21. 33. Average Minutes per Article by University Faculty Member Average Minutes Per Article Figure from www.dlib.org/dlib/october03/king/10king.html
    22. 34. Paucity of heuristics
    23. 35. We proto-librarians are informed with much fanfare in library school that librarians have a better sense for “ source authority and quality” than the average joe, and that the information sources we choose are therefore better than those the average joe chooses when left alone to choose sources. One would think that a profession that makes sweeping claims like this would spend a lot more time than it does teaching students how to evaluate sources. Leaving that Achilles heel aside, however… Dorothea Salo http://cavlec.yarinareth.net/
    24. 36. We publishers will talk with much fanfare to anyone who will listen that publishers have a better sense for “source authority and quality” than the average joe, and that the information sources we choose to publish are therefore better than those the average joe chooses to publish . One would think that a profession that makes sweeping claims like this would spend a lot more time than it does providing mechanisms to help readers evaluate sources. Leaving that Achilles heel aside, however… Geoffrey Bilder
    25. 37. http://www.laspositascollege.edu/library/magazines_journals.php
    26. 38. Susan E. Beck Collection Development Coordinator New Mexico State University Library http://lib.nmsu.edu/instruction/evalcrit.html
    27. 39. ~ www.brown.edu/~gbilder/history/index.html www.brown.edu/history/index.html
    28. 40. .gov .edu .org .com
    29. 41. https
    30. 42. http://www.foo.com
    31. 44. Citation source pioneer credit leads eponym Background FutureWork Refutation Support Methodology Data Generalize Specialize Abstraction Example Formalization Application Argument deduction induction analogy intuition solution Summarization Detail AlternateView Rewrite Explanation Simplification Complication Update Correction Continuation Comment critical supportive RelatedWork misrepresents vacuum ignores is Superseded By is Refuted By is Supported By redundant ProblemPosing trivial unimportant impossible ill-posed solved ambitious Thesis trivial unimportant irrelevant redherring contradict dubious counterexample inelegant simplistic arbitrary unmotivated Argumentation invalid insufficient immaterial misleading alternative strawman Data inadequate dubious ignores irrelevant inapplicable misinterpreted Style boring unimaginative incoherent arrogant rambling awkward Randy Trigg http://www.workpractice.com/trigg/thesis-chap4.html
    32. 45. nature nike pepsi apple
    33. 46. We want to know
    34. 62. Industry Precedents
    35. 67. The publishing process is invisible
    36. 71. Early Modern Internet
    37. 76. [email_address]

    ×