thoughts, shares, links, and the like…

Posts tagged ‘web’

Reading:Five heuristics for designing and evaluating web-based communities

Linda M Gallant, Gloria M Boone and Austin Heap are in this paper finding five examination guidelines (heuristics) for community spaces such as facebook and myspace.

They are

Interactive creativity
“This category encompasses the novel, the new, the risk, the mystery, the thrill, and the flow-like experience that can happen in using technology and content in new ways.” It is found – through focus groups – that this opportunity is best served on myspace(!).

Selective hierarchy
“Here access, membership, information filtering and related factors are explored. All social systems develop structures that unite, divide and assemble people into groups, systems, and networks. Selective hierarchy establishes leadership, pecking orders, and roles such as mentor, information provider, and social coordinator, and allows the ever present notion of in-group and out-group.”Identity construction
“People want to express their identities, individuality, lifestyles, and collective interests in communication patterns. The best online communities encourage identity posting; e.g., biographies.”

Rewards and costs
“Almost all users noted the rewards for posting on both sites. These included: staying in touch with friends, making social plans, communicating with others and “finding out” about them, and “dating.” Very few mentioned any cost or negative attributes such as privacy concerns or trust issues. A few mentioned the cost of time involved in interacting with Web-based communities.”

Artistic forms
“Artistic forms make the experience of the Web site interface more personalized. (…) These personalizing features and activities satisfy people’s need to develop individual style and create a social statement through the design of their personal community Web space.”

But I will argue that time (already) has surpassed the findings. Myspace may have more possibilities in presenting the self (interactive creativity and artistic forms), by means of altering the ‘wallpaper’ or choosing specific music to be played when surfing a profile. But when facebook made an API available they opened for external parts to developed ‘widgets’/’apps’/’plugins’ to the SNS, so that people are gaining thrills and risks through widgets as Pirate vs Ninjas and the IQ test. And these specific widgets might be a major variable making facebook a more social valuable SNS; they enable the possibility to play.

(I should say I am not a heavy user of myspace, and don’t know if same features are at service in this SNS)

I my opinion these guidelines seems to have some greater degree of overlap between them. A feature like group making is both able to be categorized under identity construction and selective hierarchy. The personalization under artistic forms seems to be a mean to build identity.

The heuristics helps give a better grasp of whats in play in the SNS’s, but on the face of it seems the guidelines do not completely clarify the elements of the analysis, because the overlapping is somewhat extensive.

Web evolution: web 1.0, web 2.0 and the semantic web

Yihong-Ding makes a good effort in explaining the web evolution. It starts off with the web 1.0 (read or write), web 2.0 (read/write) (all about the user control through the smart use of databases) and the tries to put semantic web in the next step for the evolution.

“(…) an ideal semantic web is a Read/Write/Request Web. The fundamental change is still at web space. A web space will be no longer a simple web page as on Web 1.0. Neither will a web space still be a Web-2.0-style blog/wiki that facilitates only human communications. Every ideal semantic web space will become a little thinking space. It contains owner-approved machine-processable semantics. Based on these semantics, an ideal semantic web space can actively and proactively execute owner-specified requests by themselves and communicate with other semantic web spaces. By this augmentation, a semantic web space simultaneously is also a living machine agent.”

He also pictures a good model/image of the evolution in the post.

You might also want to take a look at a demonstration of Photosynth to better grasp what semantic web is capable of. It is not exactly on the issue of semantic web, but it has some similarities:

Research on Facebook as web 2.0

My good friend Thomas has announced his undertakings on research of Facebook. It is in Danish, but because it might be helpful for my current study mates at RTF, UT (and myself) I here translate the program declaration (a bit revised):

1) What is Facebook? – with help from the five heuristics from Heap, Gallant & Boone. What makes facebook web 2.0?, what is web 2.0?
2) How do people build identity on Facebook?
3) A comparision between MySpace and Facebook.
4) The conception of privacy. Which data is the user obligated to inform and how are they asked/motivated to do it (default settings) (Using Goffmans (or Meyrowitz´) theory of interaction.
5) Potential for development – What can Facebook as virtuel community be able to do in the future?

Current bibliography :
“Heap, Boone & Gallant: Five heuristics for designing and evaluating web-based communities.
Hirschorn: About FaceBook.
Lampe, Ellison, Steinfield: A (face)book in the crowd
Lampe, Ellison, Stenfield: The benefits of facebook friends
Boyd: Friendster and publicly articulated social networking
Mazer, Murphy & Simonds: I´ll see you on facebook
Acquisti & Gross: Imagined Communities
Donath: Identity and deception in the virtual community
Goffman: Presentation of self “
quoted as it is on the post.

The research project is very similar to the studies we are doing in the course Research on web 2.0 at RTF, UT.

Sharon Strover has started a bibliography for the course, which is continuously being developed by the students.

Import the xml-file in the magnificent (open source) bibliography tool Jabref.

Tag Cloud

%d bloggers like this: