Social Web 2.0 Class Week 3: Identity, Online Matchmaking
Post on 15-Jul-2015
717 Views
Preview:
Transcript
Social Web 2.0Implications of Social Technologies for Digital Media
Shelly Farnham, Ph.D.Com 597 Winter 2007
Identity
Material, social, mental aspects of self sustained over time
The embodied selfOne body, one identityOne place at a timeMultiple roles, but one at a time usually
determined by social context
Social Identity and Social Context
Social Identity (identity in social context)Roles
Friend, daughter, secretary, judgeGroup membership
Male/female, race
Situational effects on behavior, depending on social identity activatedParty, school, knitting club
Impression Management
Self-presentation Any behavior intended to create, modify, maintain impression in
minds of others Why?
Define nature of social interaction gain material or social rewards self-construction self-enhancement
Trade off between desire to present best impression to achieve social goods
Ingratiation, self-promotion, intimidation, exemplification, supplication
Need to be accurate, accountable
Classic Self-presentation Behavior
Public claims of ability on a future task is a function ofPersonal expectation
of successAudience will learn
how well they did
Schlenker 1975 JPSP, 32 1030-1037.
Disadvantages of Online Identity
No centralized, physical presence Limited awareness of, or control over who is your
audience Interacting with multiple social contexts at same time Identity asynchronous
persists in your absence, so potential access by wrong audience Online role/situational conflict
difficulty keeping role identities separate Stress of having incompatible roles
Distrust of anonymous/minimally identified others Fraud, cheat, impersonation Trolling
Advantages of Online Identity
Anonymity/Pseudonymity Expose sensitive issues in way can’t do offline
Health Alternative life style/sexuality Interpersonal stories
Broadcast profile enables access to others Without having to go to bars, job agencies Use sophisticated matchmaking systems
Identity play Fraud, cheat, impersonation Trolling
Self-presentation Online Constraints in presentation medium
FtF: Dress, body language, paraverbal cues, car, home Online: Profiles, home pages, blogs, text, music, avatars Conventional signal vs. assessment signal
Unknown audience Self-presentation
Often insufficient information about audience for effective self-presentation Teenager presenting self as cool by drinking beer to friend vs. parent Fetishist presenting self to fellow fetishists vs. work environment
Role/situational interaction expectations People somewhat uncomfortable without knowledge of age, sex, location, race, SES Situational expectations (party vs. school)
Harrassment concerns – don’t want to reveal I am fifteen year old girl Identity theft – don’t want to expose my credit car number Question of authority
Does the person have sufficient expertise to be making knowledge claims? Accountability
If person is not help accountable by being anonymous, tend to distrust --- with reason.
Profiles – what matters?
Unique identifies Name, birthday, email, home address, phone, web address
Social identities Sex, age, race, SES, citizenship/nationality, language
Roles and memberships School/employmnet, social roles, voluntary membership groups
Interest and activities Hobbies, interests, activities, sports
Preferences/tastes Musical, movie, books, food, dislikes, likes
Personal characteristics Intelligence, interpersonal style (e.g. introverted), affective style (e.g. cheerful)
Values and beliefs Religion, political beliefs, ethics, spirituality
Social standing/reputation Liked, respected, leader
Profiles – what matters?Importance Ratings
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
Age
Gen
der
Loca
tion
Eth
nici
ty
Per
sona
l sta
tem
ent
Hei
ght
Bod
y ty
pe
App
eara
nce
(oth
er)
Rel
igio
n P
erso
nal v
alue
sD
ream
s an
d go
als
Edu
catio
n
Em
ploy
men
t sta
tus
Occ
upat
ion
Ann
ual i
nco
me
Mar
ital s
tatu
sC
hild
ren?
Fam
ily in
form
atio
nP
erso
nal h
abits
Life
styl
e in
foR
eadi
ng in
tere
sts
Inte
rnet
use
Hob
bies
/act
iviti
es
Tra
vel/d
inin
g in
tere
sts
Per
sona
lity
Dat
ing
pref
eren
ces
Profile Items
Per
cen
t in
dic
atin
g it
em im
po
rtan
t
Davis et al. unpublished paper
Profile features – What matters?
Text Fields Open-ended personal statement Blog entries
Pictures Video Audio Links
Friend lists Groups
Xbox Matchmaking Study
Who do you want to play with, based on type of profile.
(riegelsberg et al. 2006)
Identity Crisis in Web 2.0
Digital identity: “….a person or thing represented or existing in the digital realm which is being described or dealt with”. (Kim Cameron)
Patchwork of identity one-offs Susceptible to criminalization
Phishing, Pharming Need unifying identity metasystem
Reliable way to establish who is connecting with what Hard to create standardized identity layer
Web sites want control of identity, prevent spillover to other web sites
Laws of Identity (Kim Cameron)
1. User control and consent2. Minimal disclosure for a constrained use3. Justifiable parties4. Directed Identity
Omnidirectional Unidirectional
5. Pluralism of operators and technologies6. Human integration (ceremony)7. Consistent experience across contexts
Identity in an Age of Web 2.0
OpenID (Http://openid.net/) -- opensourceAuthenticationAuthorization
ACL (Access control list) RBAC (Role based access control)
Identity informationSingle sign (SSO) on across multiple
properties
Plaxo
Online address book People essentially subscribe to each
other’s contact infoSyncs with common email systemsUpdates automatically distributed
MyBlogLog
Profile for conversation in blogosphereso readers are as discoverable as authorsFoster awareness around audience, and
conversation
Match Making 11% internet users gone to dating sites 37% of single internet users 17% of those who have used dating services entered long-term
relationship with someone met therePew:http://www.pewinternet.org/report_display.asp?r=177
Personals web site drew 40 million unique visitors in U.S. – ½ # of single adults. Mulrine 2003
The top five online dating sites in Dec. 2005, were Yahoo Personals, Match.com, Spark Networks, True.com, and Mate1.com, according to comScore.
Yahoo's was far and away the most popular, with 24.04 million visitors, compared with 3.6 million for second-place Match.
Determinants of Attraction
Proximity Repeated exposure “mere exposure effect”
Physical attractiveness Similarity
Birds of a feather…not opposites attract
Reciprocation Matching hypothesis – pair off similar in physical
attractiveness
Social Matching Online Matching goals
Dating, expertise, gaming partner
Types of systems Search/sort/match systems
Mainstream (match.com, yahoo) Subpopulation (Jdate.com, manhunt.net)
Personality matching Semi-automatic matching
Social networks Features
Profiles Search Matchmaking algorithms Graduated privacy and communication
Xbox MatchMaking Study
What you care about depends on kind of player you are.
Impact of Attributes by Player Type
-0.4
-0.3
-0.2
-0.1
0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
Cor
rela
tion
wit
h P
refe
ren
ce (
Q1) Socially-Oriented
Player
Skill-OrientedPlayer
Likebility Friendli-ness
CommitedGamer
Skill Intell. Socio-Economic
Status
Xbox MatchMaking Study
-0.2
-0.1
0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
Cor
rela
tion
with
Pre
fere
nce
(Q1)
. Socially-Oriented
Player
Skill-Oriented Player
Text Profile
PhotoProfile
Voice Profile
Impact of Age by Player Type and Condition
Reputation information study
Explored what reputation information in a profile people cared about the most in selecting a chat partner.
Found they cared the most about ratings by friends, then about similarity to self. Cared less about overall measures of rank/ratings.
Importance of Information in selecting chat partner
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
Rank
Rating
Similarity
Interacts with friends
Ratings by friends
(jensen et al. 2000?))
Team projects (3 or 4)
The term project allows you to apply what we discuss in class to a real-life situation or issue that you want to explore.
Assume your team (of 2 or 3 people) is hired as a consultant for another
company that wishes to explore how to use social technologies to enhance user’s experience of some form of digital media (e.g. text, pictures, music, video). First, you will review related technologies, discussing advantages and disadvantages of each in terms of theory underlying design of social technology systems. Then, you will identify your client’s target users and their particular social and informational goals. Finally, you will storyboard and wireframe a social software system incorporating your understanding of underlying theory, your target users, and current trends in the field. Your system may either newly design or redesign your client’s current system.
You will be expected to present your project as a power point presentation, and in part as a written spec, with the assumption that your client company is the audience of both your presentation and your written spec.
Week 3: Teams formed Week 4: Submit a 250 word abstract of client’s problem Week 5: Provide written draft of literature review Week 6: Provide written draft of technology review Week 7: Provide written draft of assessment of target users Week 8: Provide powerpoint draft of storyboard & wireframe Week 9: Provide powerpoint draft of intro, lit & tech review, and assessment of target users Week 10: Provide final draft of written spec, and present project in
class. I will provide feedback at each stage, so for week 10 you are
expected to update the final draft of your powerpoint presentation and written spec incorporating the feedback provided. The written spec should include the bibliography.
Schedule (3 or 4)
Developing Client Problem Specifying the client problem to be solved, 250 words max. Due next week. Example:
VJ Central is a web site where VJs go to share knowledge, resources and collaborate. They approached our team because they believe that while VJs are posting some videos, they are not using the site to collaborate by building on each other’s content. They are interested in improving how their users share video clips that they created through the site, potentially using creative commons licensing. Our task is to explore issues of sharing videos clips that are specific to VJs, and storyboard a tool that a) allows users to find relevant content from others based on similarity in style and musical interests with a social rating system b) download and modify it, and then c) repost it, such that for any piece of media they can trace how its use has evolved.
top related