Category: information representation

Categories
exam readings information representation science studies visuals

Exam reading: “Framework for visual science”

I’m jumping from a cognitive science approach to visuals back to a more social & rhetorical approach with this chapter. Like my last two readings, this one provides yet another framework for analyzing scientific visuals, but the approach is pretty different (which is great, because I feel like I really need a break from the framework stuff at the moment.)

Also, I believe this is one of the longest titles in one of my readings…

Luc Pauwels. “A Theoretical Framework for Assessing Visual Representational Practices in Knowledge Building and Science Communications.” in Luc. Pauwels (ed) Visual Cultures of Science: Rethinking Representational Practices in Knowledge Building and Science, pp. 1-25. Hanover: Dartmouth College Press, 2006.

Summary: Pauwels’ aim is to establish a framework for analyzing scientific visualizations that includes: the nature of the referent, type of medium, methodology for creation, and uses of the resulting image. The nature of scientific referents falls on a continuum from material/physical to mental/conceptual: directly observable, visible with tools, non-visual phenomena, explanations of non-visual data trends, postulated phenomena and metaphors. Representations can include multiple types of referents (e.g., photo with arrows for non-visual process), and each representation expresses a reality that shapes the image’s interpretation. Illustrations should be both representative of their subject matter and valid examples of the subject (e.g., a photo of a specific bird vs. a stylized drawing of that species.) Production processes all have intertwined social, technological, and cultural aspects (affordances, conventions, and constraints.) Different referents will have “appropriate” conventions for presentation; conventions also vary with the purpose of the illustration (further analysis, teach concepts, etc.) The upshot is that representations have multiple purposes/motivations and may be interpreted differently (e.g., can be used as boundary objects.)

Comments: Scientific illustrations are less a transparent “window” than a carefully selected and stylized rhetorical presentation (though P. doesn’t use “rhetoric”.) Discusses the need for greater awareness of all aspects of his framework for scientific illustrators (and also public)- e.g., awareness of implications of disciplinary conventions for image format. Physical representations are inherently social objects, unlike mental representations. Visual media have one important constraint- that they depict a specific example, rather than words, which can specify a range (e.g., a specific drawing of a flower vs. “this flower has 6-8 petals”)- the viewer has to decide how significant each element of the illustration is (if they even have the awareness to judge this.) Verbal descriptions or use of conventions can help with this problem.

Links to: Kostelnick & Hassett (conventions & rhetorical uses of images); Gilbert (categories of scientific illustrations)

Categories
exam readings information representation learning theory visuals

Exam readings: Distributed cognition and visualizations

For today, here are two related papers on distributed cognition (the idea that our thinking processes are intimately tied up with our environments, rather than being just internal) and images. The first paper presents a framework for understanding visualizations as part of distributed cognition, and the second applies that framework to studying interactive visualizations.

Jiajie Zhang, and Donald. A. Norman. “Representations in Distributed Cognitive Tasks.” Cognitive Science 18(1): 87-122, 1994.

Summary: In this paper, the authors present their theory of distributed cognition to describe how people conceptualize and perform tasks. Tasks are modeled using both internal and external components to create “distributed” representations. There are three basic problems in this view: the distributed representation of information, interaction between internal and external representations, and the nature of external representations. They discuss the “representational effect:” how different representations of the same information can have different cognitive effects (e.g., Roman vs. Arabic numerals and ease of calculation.) At issue here is that there are both internal and external “rules” in all problem representations; some formats contain more explicit or more easily understood external “rules,” which makes it easier to mentally interact with them. They outline a methodology for representational analysis that breaks done representations into component parts (skipping over details of this.) While external representations are aids to memory, they have additional functions: structuring (internal) cognition and providing information that does not need to be internalized in order to form a mental representation (affordances), and changing the fundamental nature of tasks.

Comments: The authors’ model of cognition suggests that differences among external representations will influence internal representations, or how information is learned. Practical implications include applicability of their ideas to effective design of representations. Not sure I will apply their methodology to my work, but theoretical approach is useful.

Links to: Kostelnick & Hassett (take rhetorical, rather than cognitive, approach to representation, point out that efficiency is usually not the driving force behind design); Liu et al. (argument to apply these ideas to info visualization)

Zhicheng Liu, Nancy J. Nersessian, and John T. Stasko. “Distributed Cognition as a Theoretical Framework for Information Visualization.” IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics. 14.6 (2008): 1173-1180.

Summary: The authors suggest using distributed cognition as a framework for information visualization research (not well-developed enough to serve as theory at this point-lacks predictive, prescriptive aspects.) Distributed cognition holds that cognition arises from the interaction of the mind with objects in the environment, rather than as just internal symbol processing as in the traditional view of cognition. The mind works by building an internal representation of an object that coordinates all the viewer’s external observations of the object; bringing the internal and external representations into agreement. Using this framework, we can look at interaction with data representations as the “propagation of representation states in a cognitive system through coordination;” i.e., as the process of building mental models. The act of manipulation helps us understand things (e.g., Tetris.) The authors also discuss the importance of testing how info visualization systems work in practice to help create mental models, rather than testing just ease of use or how well people like using a particular visualization.

Comments: Includes a discussion of Zhang’s and Norman’s “Representations” paper, which I’m also reading. The authors mention importance of linking research in interactive visualization to current cognitive science and perception research. This paper suggests both that interactivity is a useful property for building understanding and that holistic evaluation of mental models is appropriate for evaluating such interactions; they mention “social visualization:” sharing visualizations over the Web for exploring data representations.

Links to: Zhang & Norman

Categories
discourse community/community of practice exam readings information representation rhetoric visuals

Exam reading: The rhetoric of visual conventions

On to my next exam reading list, which is focused on discourse communities, and the use of new media technologies and visuals in these communities.

Charles Kostelnick  and Michael Hassett’s Shaping Information: The Rhetoric of Visual Conventions wasn’t exactly what I expected. It presents a rhetorical view of visual design, in a framework of discourse communities. I think I was expecting more specific recommendations from this book, but it does provide a good link between the visual and community-focused materials on my list:

Summary: The authors attempt to construct a framework for analyzing visual rhetoric, based on conventions used in various genres, the social forces that shape those conventions, and the situation-specific interpretation of conventions by users/readers. Visual conventions frame our understanding of the world; they make design coherent and provide shortcuts for interpretation by readers. Three types of factors shape conventions: discourse community (e.g., disciplinary, cultural), rhetorical (e.g., pragmatic, imitation), and practical (e.g., cost, laws). Conventions are generated within discourse communities (and learning conventions is required for joining those communities); they’re mutable but can appear permanent. There are different levels of understanding conventions, e.g., using a physics formula on a t-shirt to evoke “geekiness;” increasing centrality in a specialist d.c. leads to more complex understanding of codes. Conventions have shifting “currency” (size of user pool + frequency of use); designers must make rhetorical choices about what to use. Finally, conventions can be hard to see, because they’re usually deployed with other conventions, and especially in specialist discourse can seem “natural.”

Comments: Emphasis is on the discourse community process as the basis for discussion of convention use in different genres; there’s a large social aspect to visual design for the authors. They discuss the ways conventions can either simplify or complicate the act of perception, but do not include a lot of detail from empirical studies; they do include a chapter on the types of convention “breakdown” that can occur (designers and users are in different d.c.’s, conflict with other conventions in the same work, etc.). They also discuss evolution of conventions, framed by the ways that the discourse communities that gave rise to those conventions changed.

Links to: Tufte 1, 2 (K&H would call his a specific type of rhetoric)

Categories
exam readings information representation politics research methods/philosophy

Exam reading: “Intermediation and its malcontents”

My last core reading- and an appropriate one to end on. Robert Jensen’s “Intermediation and its Malcontents” is about the importance of (not-for-profit) publishers in the academic publication ecosystem. It’s appropriate because it provides me a segue into the material on my next reading list, which is about the public communication of science. One of the big PUoS issues is: how much intermediation should there be between scientists and the public about scientific issues? And one of the key services that Jensen claims that publishers provide is intermediation.

Now, Jensen’s paper is about humanities publishing, but some of the ideas are the same in scientific fields. And while he’s obviously trying to argue the case that publishing houses (like his) provide essential services as intermediaries, there’s a wide range of opinion on the proper place of intermediation in science communication. But more on that later…

Summary: Jensen focuses on the value that’s added to academic publishing by publishers (small-run non-profit presses), mainly: validation, coordination, authority, and promotion. When adding e-publishing to a press, things to consider are cost-sharing (for editing & staff to be cost-effective, he claims you need to be running at least 6-8 journals), the need to choose an appropriate platform, and planning to track electronic copies and paper inventories. Jensen feels that traditional print-based models of writing are best for many scholarly works, and this is unlikely to change. He discusses several cost-recovery models: subscription, print on demand, timed access, free archives/pay for new issues, and free new issues/pay for archive access. He advocates a “sustainable” scholarly publication infrastructure it intermediate between scholars and the public. As support, he outlines several ways in which publishers add value in a less-intermediated world: specialists are efficient, they can tailor works for specific audiences, and vetted material is better than non-vetted. He suggests that close interaction between academic groups interested in e-publishing is vital. These include librarians, techies, publishers, departments, and individual scholars.

Comments: Claims that volunteerism for e-journals is reaching its limit- not sure how this claim has held up. Gives long anecdote about the effects of the fall of Communism on Czech presses as a cautionary tale to compare to the e-publishing “revolution”- this is more of a metaphor than a direct parallel, but many of his concerns are probably justified re: radical changes without a plan. Almost as an aside, he ends with a discussion of the stifling nature of current copyright law, and urges non-profit publishers to stop siding with for-profits in lobbying efforts.

Links to: Bolter (decline of authority in online publishing); Liu (similar tone of justification for humanities disciplines in a digital world); Lessig (copyright wars)

Categories
exam readings information representation research methods/philosophy

Exam reading: “Digital History”

Only two more readings to go on my core list! I suspect I’m not going to be as long-winded in my summaries when I move on to the next two lists, but we’ll see… These last few readings are all online texts. I will confess- I really dislike reading long works online. I don’t really have time to cite and elucidate why, but I don’t like doing it. Maybe that’s a topic for an actual post, when I have time.

Ever wanted to start your own amateur history website? (Memories of the Cape Coral Burrowing Owls? People who went to that one Phish concert that changed their lives? Those who mourn Geocities?) In “Digital History,” Cohen and Rosenzweig tell you how. I can see how this would be a very good resource for those wanting to start research or archival websites, and certainly not just for history:

Summary: The authors believe that electronic technologies can enhance historical work in several ways; this book is essentially a how-to manual for those wanting to start an online project. For example, large storage capacity allows us to expand the criteria for preservation of works (though extreme ephemerality of storage media & systems may mean that the possibility of preserving everything won’t be practical.) Online archives and sites expand access both to researchers and the public, sites can facilitate community participation (e.g., a community archive of the history of Town X), and database structures allow many different types of information to be linked & presented simultaneously. Some of the problems with online works include issues of quality and authenticity, durability, readability, corporate control of the medium, and the possibility that websites foster passivity in users (“interactivity” often boils down to “click through out TV-show tie-in site and then click here to buy”.) They offer suggestions for dealing with most of these issues. One of the main things they address is long-term preservation and archiving, the importance of using at least comment tags and update records, though preferably professional archive standards, and finding a permanent home for the site. They also address the importance of finding a good scope for the project, attracting visitors, and encouraging repeat visits. Another important issue is copyright- they advocate a Creative Commons approach (limited copyright on your work), and documenting attempts to secure rights if you’re not using public domain works.

Comments: A few chapters on technical considerations that I’m eliding, e.g., database vs. XML, digitization & data loss, design for usability by typical (i.e., commercial) WWW standards can oversimplify presentation. Considering archival issues is obviously a crucial issue for not just historians, though obviously they have a strong interest in this.

Links to: Lessig (Byzantine copyright laws); Burnard et al. (XML); McGann (example of online archive)

Categories
exam readings information representation research methods/philosophy

Exam reading: “Electronic textual editing”

“Electronic Textual Editing” describes the main data archiving standards effort for the humanities. It’s not really a dynamic read- how thrilling can a collection of essays on XML and database construction really be? But it’s a useful overview of the TEI:

Summary: A collection of essays dealing with editing and archiving issues with electronic texts. Focuses on the Text Encoding Initiative: project to create best practices and markup languages (SGML, then XML) for the humanities. It can be broken into three main parts: general guidelines for creating and digital editing of scholarly editions, case studies and lessons for editing both older and modern texts, and specific technical methods (e.g., digitizing documents, dealing with character encoding and markup). For scholarly editions, important considerations are accuracy in documentation and thorough inclusion of text variants. Digital editions/collections allow researchers to create quite accurate versions of a text (e.g., scanned copies), collect multiple versions of said document, and dynamically link them all. The functions of markup language include labeling (and linking) sites of variability among texts, and replicating structural/layout elements in electronic text versions of originally print documents. A few of the case studies had some interesting points. The digitizer of the Canterbury Tales points to the importance of having explicit principles for transcription before starting, and discusses how reading an electronic version of the text changes the editing & reading experience. For the creator of an electronic Thomas Edison archive, the major task seemed to be developing a good database to link text- & image-based documents. For poetry digitization, it was key to pay attention to both words and layout.

Comments: Glossed over the detailed technical essays, and focused on what I thought were the most salient points. Most authors were quite keen on XML for its formatting abilities, which I’ve used derivatives of (XHTML & CSS). As I’m not involved with archiving or creating digital editions, this was more of an overview of this area of T&T.

Links to: McGann (TEI, digital archives); Headrick (classification systems in general)

Categories
exam readings identity information representation visuals

Exam reading: “Simulacra and simulation”

Jean Baudrillard’s “Simulacra and Simulation” is popular among a certain set of postmodern enthusiasts, including the Wachowski brothers. I won’t go into how this book influenced The Matrix- you can go elsewhere for that.

Here’s my summary:

Summary: Baudrillard’s main concern is for cultural impacts of mass/electronic media. Our culture of simulation has progressed to the point that simulation no longer refers to the real world- it is “hyperreal.” Reality has been replaced by nested systems of sighs, all referring to one another; he calls this “precession of simulacra.” Images began as reflections of reality, became masks for reality, then masks that mask the absence of reality, and are now not related to reality (but to other images). Examples include the Lascaux caves (we now only experience the simulation of Lascaux II) and Disneyland (an imaginary world, set up to mask the fact that America is itself only a simulation, in which people take on roles but never truly interact). In some sense, electronic media make everything a simulation (e.g., political scandals mask broader truths about the capitalist system, nuclear deterrence and how MAD means no one will ever have to use nukes since we know what will happen). He also discusses historical movies, which are more “real” than the reality was; history is no longer an active force-all cultures are congealing into one, and all that’s left is nostalgia. Takes “medium is the message” to extreme: e.g., culture (content) in museums is merely a support for the medium to operate (the visitor experience)- the point is to have visitors, not transmit the culture; also, advertising/propaganda are becoming the dominant features of mass media- publicity is all that matters (not ideas or meanings).

Comments: Briefly discusses how cloning & medical research are another expression of mass-production (reproducible, without aura)- rather than taking a cyborg approach, he links this phenomenon to Benjamin’s ideas. I’m glossing over education- says the only ways for non-conformists to not conform are either dropping out entirely or committing terrorism.

Links to: Benjamin (mass-produced society; body); McLuhan (medium)

Categories
exam readings information representation

Exam reading: “Orality and literacy”

I felt like I needed to do a re-read today and take a little bit of a break. “Orality and Literacy,” by Walter Ong, is about the ways that writing technologies have affected human ideas and expression. It’s a book I’ve read in two classes thus far.

One of the things I had fun with previously with this book was an assignment to represent the different developments discussed in it in timeline format. Since Ong primarily focuses on European history (though he does provide examples from other cultures), I wanted to include developments from other regions, and situate the whole project within the entire timeline of human history. Part of my reason for this is my background with Hawaiian culture- a culture in which the transition from orality to literacy has happened fairly recently. It required a lot of thought, some big changes in scale, and several hours on Illustrator, but I’m pretty happy with it.

Here’s a preview of the timeline:

Ong timeline preview

Here’s the full pdf. (Dates are approximate.)

And here’s my summary of the book:

Summary: Taking oral culture as a baseline, Ong explores the impacts that writing technologies (first script, then print, and now electronic technologies) have had on human expression, patterns of thought, and society at large. For example, Ong states that oral cultures were largely communal, and that storytelling relied on creative and situation-dependent groupings of stock formulas and characters. Learning was rooted in apprenticeship and daily practice, and naming gave people power over objects. The technological shift of writing led to solitary contemplation of ideas, complex storytelling, abstract learning, and using names as tags in text “containers.” Print enhanced these developments, and led to a more sophisticated use of visual space, organization of information (e.g., indexing, glossaries), and dominance of a few writing systems. Finally, electronic technologies are continuing some print trends (e.g., spatializing information, a high level of text processing), but are also promoting a turn to a “secondary orality” of participatory expression. Ong addresses several other issues important to cultural scholars, such as a shift from aural to visual sense primacy that writing helped promote, the rise of the unitary self, and the incompleteness of a sender/receiver model of communication.

Comments: This is a foundational work that informs the entire field of T&T, and contains a large amount of material (e.g., effects on memory, theoretical differences between writing systems-which I’ve glossed over). Ong states that most literary historians of his time approached oral cultures from an unconscious written perspective; he tries to point out the biases that can creep in to scholarship from this perspective, which are important to keep in mind. I remain not entirely convinced that there actually was a dramatic aural/visual shift of the sort that Ong (and other theorists) proposes, but that’s only one of the main themes of this book.

Links to: McLuhan (communication media effects); Benjamin (changing technologies’ effects on perception of works); Headrick (communication media); Turkle (identity & writing technology); Murray (narrative and technology); Bolter (remediation during media shifts); some connections to visuals, info organization

Categories
exam readings information representation visuals

Exam Reading: “When Information Came of Age”

It’s been a while since I’ve posted, since I’ve been wrapping up an internship at the Cornell Lab of Ornithology. I’ll post about what I’ve done there later… For now, I’ve got a new book summary. “When Information Came of Age”, by Daniel Headrick, was actually interesting to read at this point. Circling back to the internship (which I really will discuss later), I’ve been dealing with issues of representing information about bird families in different formats. This book discusses the histories of information systems that were a big part of this process. But more on that later…

Summary: Headrick proposes that the current “Information Age” is only one of many historical information revolutions; in this book, he focuses on the information revolution of the Enlightenment. He outlines five categories of information systems: classifying/organizing, transforming, display, storage/retrieval, and communicating. His thesis is that developments in these information systems in this time period, coupled with subsequent technological inventions, laid the groundwork for the Information Age. During this period, demographic, cultural, political, and economic changes helped create an information build-up that could only be made sense of by inventing new information systems. So, for example, scientific nomenclature and classification systems were developed that suggested explanations for phenomena (e.g., the chemical classification system suggested possible new compounds). Statistics were used to transform demographic, political, and economic information that was beginning to be collected. Visual information displays (maps, graphs, and thematic maps) were used to display large datasets efficiently and in an easily-recalled manner. Cross-referenced dictionaries and encyclopedias were successful at disseminating current, easy-to-access information to the general public (in contrast to dense, thematically-linked former formats). Postal and telegraphic systems (visual and electric) were devised to transmit messages; these went from private messenger services to restricted government systems to more open government systems.

Comments: This book gives a good overview of the development of information systems, though some of the chapters are more comprehensive than others. His emphasis on information systems, rather than previous technologies that facilitated them (e.g., the printing press) or subsequent technological innovations, was an interesting choice (though apparently he’s addressed later periods in other books.) This would probably be a useful book to use in a History of T&T course. While heavy on the names and dates, it covers a really interesting period of history (see my Blituri project, and I will add that the Baroque Cycle is a mostly-excellent series set right before this period :).

Links to: Tufte (information representation); Benjamin (technologies of representation); Ong (social and technical aspects of changing representational practices)