¿qué hacen las redes?

1. Don't put words in people's mouths. In fact, talk as little as possible. A pause that's a bit longer than a pause would be comfortable in everyday conversation can work wonders in provoking further insights from a respondent. It signals that you're waiting for them to say more, and gives them time and space to think more deeply. (See? Awkward pauses aren't a reflection on your social skills. It's a research technique.)

Yes, you have to say things sometimes, but you don't have to say a lot. Often just saying "Hmm" will provoke an interviewee to expand on an idea or offer up new information. "Can you say a little more about that?", repeating an interesting word mentioned by the respondent in a questioning tone, briefly re-stating what the respondent just said to make sure you're understanding can also all be interview gold.

2. Try to avoid positive or negative feedback. Listening to lots of interviews about people's experiences with illicit drugs gave me a clearer idea of why this can be a good guiding concept. If an interviewer says "That's wonderful" in response to someone's description of a recent attempt to quit using a substance, the respondent may react by emphasizing quitting attempts and downplaying current use, for example. There's no getting around the feedback loop between an interviewer and a respondent, and that loop can be an important part of analysis, but avoiding positive or negative feedback as much as possible can often produce information that is less aligned with the interviewer's biases.

3. Expect to be surprised. But don't expect anything else. A difficult part of the notion that interviewers should avoid positive or negative feedback is that not getting much feedback can make some people shut down. Also lots of people use expressions with a positive inflection like "That's great" as conversational support.

For me the word "interesting" can be a good compromise - partly just because it's a word I say too much anyway. What's not interesting? But "interesting" can also be a way to let people know that you want to hear more without expressing a judgment about the content of what they're saying, and without imposing "common sense" expectations about what people are saying or how they're interpreting it. If I say someone's attempt to quit using a substance is "great," I might not learn that, for example, quitting made the respondent realize all the things they enjoy about the substance and that they never want to quit using it again.

4. Respondents are the experts on their own experiences. You are just there to listen and learn. It can be helpful to say something at the beginning like "I might ask some questions that seem really dumb or obvious. That's just part of the interview process. You're the expert, and I want to try to understand how you see things, in your own words." You don't necessarily have to ‘lead' an interview. Sometimes what seems like a tangent in the moment ends up being the most meaningful part of an interview.

But yeah, you do have to guide people, and manage how much you need to cover in a limited amount of time. In an interview where the interviewer and respondent can see each other, body language can work really well for this. Although introverted or shy people may not always be great with body language, it can be more manageable when you understand your role as primarily listening, and the spotlight is not on you. One visual cue that I use in interviews is hunching down and making myself visually lower than the respondent. They're the expert. When I need to jump in and it's hard to find a good pause, I sit up straighter, maybe shuffle around some papers. This usually produces a pause and I can jump in without it feeling like a jarring interruption.

5. Recruiting complete strangers can totally work. When I've needed to "get out and meet people" for a recruiting effort, I have found that handing out flyers in person has worked best for me. (A) I don't have to give a spiel. (B) The people I'm encountering don't have to waste time trying to figure out whether/how to engage with the possibly crazy person's spiel, but can just read the flyer if they feel like it (assuming literacy or language differences aren't an issue) and then let me know if they're interested. If you're a smile-y sort of person, smiling can help, or just generally looking approachable. You don't necessarily have to be the life of the party who has mastered circulating and networking though. People may find it easier to approach you on their own terms.

Rachelle Annechino (22-3-2012)  Interviewing for Introverts (post) Ethnography Matters

Los sectores privado y público han mostrado sus limitaciones. "El sistema público está cada vez más acorralado por las organizaciones empresariales. Es cada vez más prisionero de sus pánicos", asegura Lafuente. Aun así, los tres sectores son necesarios. Cada uno tiene su función y están obligados a convivir. "La relación será tensa. Unas veces dos sectores serán aliados y otras veces estarán enfrentados".

El procomún está surgiendo desde las entrañas del planeta. "Es puro empoderamiento. No surge por buenismo (acciones y políticas de ayuda a los desfavorecidos). Es una cuestión de saber gestionarse", indica el investigador. "En cada lugar el procomún tendrá que encontrar su propio estilo. Ese patrón organizativo tendrá que ser abierto y horizontal. No necesita jefes, pero necesita organización. Las comunidades tienen la palabra. Son las que tienen que dar respuestas. Tienen que expresarse por sí mismas, empoderarse por sí mismas".

Antonio Lafuente (2012) en Yorokobu: ¿De quién es el aire?

El decanato me impide mantener lo que propuse para la red social de la universidad.

Pero sigo viendo que el análisis del discurso web es una de la bazas metodológicas de este momento y lo defenderé en la próxima reunión de la sección de teorías y métodos los días 13 y 14 en Madrid, entre los congresos preparatorios de la AE-IC. org.

Comentaba a José Luis Orihuela, que Twitter es clave en este momento en gestión de reputación; pero también en construcción de comunidades, para los medios como para otras organizaciones. Por muchas herramientas y aplicaciones que hagamos, no está resuelto el aprendizaje y el diseño de investigación para estas breves y poderosas interacciones.

Un viejo modelo, hoy negocio, sobre aprendizaje en recuperación de información: fases The Big6 is a process model of how people of all ages solve an information problem. Recomendado por Cristobal Cobo. PDF

1. Task Definition 1.1 Define the information problem 1.2 Identify information needed (to solve the information problem) o What is my current task? o What are some topics or questions I need to answer? o What information will I need?

2. Information Seeking Strategies 2.1 Determine all possible sources (brainstorm) 2.2 Select the best sources o What are all the possible sources to check? o What are the best sources of information for this task?

3. Location and Access 3.1 Locate sources (intellectually and physically) 3.2 Find information within sources o Where can I find these sources? o Where can I find the information in the source?

4. Use of Information 4.1 Engage (e.g., read, hear, view, touch) 4.2 Extract relevant information o What information do I expect to find in this source? o What information from the source is useful?

5. Synthesis 5.1 Organize from multiple sources 5.2 Present the information o How will I organize my information? o How should I present my information?

6. Evaluation 6.1 Judge the product (effectiveness) 6.2 Judge the process (efficiency) o Did I do what was required? o Did I complete each of the Big6 Stages efficiently?

También se puede ampliar con un estudio también conocido y citado, de A.W. Lazonder, J.-F. Rouet (2008) en Computers in Human Behavior 24 (2008) 753–765

Information problem solving instruction: Some cognitive and metacognitive issues, en pdf.

La lectura completa de este texto completo sobre estudios infantiles de estos problemas con información, puede llevar una media hora. También recomendado por Cristobal Cobo, extracto algunos párrafos para su reflexión.

De Vries et al. restricted the search space by providing a list of pre-selected Websites. They emphasized that ‘‘. . . narrowing the search space by providing a portal can free learners from selecting relevant Websites so that they can concentrate on locating and processing relevant information’’. Merely preselecting relevant sources, however, proved to be insufficient. In their second study, de Vries et al. improved the visual structuring of the information by categorizing the Websites according to the specific topic or aspects of the problem space. In the study by Stadtler and Bromme, the structuring of contents was facilitated by providing students with pre-defined categories on a note taking window. As mentioned in their discussion, the provision of categories did not just facilitate note taking. It also ‘‘stimulated laypersons to seek new elements of the categories at hand’’.

¿Cómo resolver la infoxicación?

In computerized IPS, on the other hand, the student is usually faced with more information than needed. Furthermore, the texts available are multiple and not always mutually coherent. Thus the student cannot and does not have to integrate all available information. Instead, he or she must make informed decisions about what to consider and what to ignore. These decisions rely strongly on the student’s initial interpretation of the problem (see above) but also on their ability to activate and use their prior knowledge (Symons & Pressley, 1993).

¿cómo construir categorías (etiquetas) cooperativas (colaborativas, incluso se integran de modo congruente y coherente)?

There are also two basic approaches to supporting metacognition (Lin, 2001). On the one hand, support can be given through metacognitive interventions such as strategy training programs, metacognitive prompts, and modeling. While the scope and nature of these interventions can be quite diverse, they all relate directly to the students’ metacognitive actions. Support may also be offered by creating a supportive social environment for metacognition. This usually involves a change in classroom culture and arrangements in order to stimulate the use of metacognitive activities. For example, allowing students to work together will lead to higher instances and increased awareness of metacognitive activities (Lazonder, 2005). Collaboration also encourages students to engage in spontaneous reflec- tion when they compare their work with that of others or are exposed to multiple perspectives in the classroom (Lin, 2001).

¿cómo organizar y acompañar tareas y prácticas informacionales?

The effects of the embedded instruction were assessed on a post-test that asked students to solve an unfamiliar information problem. This measure seems consistent with the study’s central aim to enhance students’ performance on future search tasks. Post-test results showed that students who received the embedded instruction regulated their search more often than students from the control group. However, within-group comparisons revealed that the frequency of regulation on the pre- and post-test was comparable. The between-group difference seems therefore at least partially attributable to the observed decrease in regulative skill use in the control group. Apart from that the interpretation of the higher frequencies in the trained group is complicated by the absence of data on the quality of the regulation. Frequent regulation of search behavior is desirable; frequently performing high-quality regulative skills is even more desirable.

La tradición interpretativa en comunicación (más información en la categoría de interacción o hermenéutica y un flash en la entrada de perspectivas en este mismo blog) es la que situa en su contexto y enfoque las competencias para concluir y completar la comprensión de las operaciones investigadoras realizadas bajo las competencias anteriores.

Entre las perspectivas teóricas interaccionistas e interpretativistas, en su mayoría clásicas, destaca en los últimos años el conectivismo (algunas citas seleccionadas en el microblog ComuniSfera).

Independientemente de lo que pueda evolucionar la teoría comunicológica con tan recientes aportaciones, debemos recordar y revisar las limitaciones de la etnometodología al aplicarla a los discursos en una red social.

El campo de investigación es variado y complejo ya que como ha expuesto Cardoso, nuestras prácticas de comunicación y de información son discontinuas, móviles, por diferentes dispositivos. No sólo procesamos lo que dicen los medios con la interpretación de nuestra propia cultura. También modificamos nuestras creencias, actitudes y costumbres con las comunicaciones y relaciones en un conjunto de redes sociales más frecuentes que nuestro contacto con los medios.

Debemos ser conscientes durante la investigación que en la etnografía digital coinciden los roles de participante y de observador/a (J Soriano).Esto que es justificado motivo de crítica representa una ventaja para alcanzar otras dimensiones de interpretación. Sin embargo, tal comprensión no se alcanza si se simplifica el saber compartido y el estilo comunitario a una recopilación documental, por muy valiosos que sean los testimonios destacados. La interpretación es una operación distinta, posterior, que busca explicitar el saber y valor colectivo más allá de la recopilación o selección de documentos registrados.

Específicamente Hine ha concretado diez características para la etnografía digital (resumen de Soriano).

Más que al uso de herramientas digitales en investigación correponde a la investigación de redes sociales (etnografía digital, netnografía, redes etnográficas) el ajuste y reforma de las técnicas de investigación a la actual comunicación en red. (las técnicas clásicas de investigación se describen en la categoría técnicas de este mismo blog).

El relato etnográfico digital pretende trascender la tradicional etnografía personal en una focalización y expresión colectiva, como nueva forma de manifestación reflexiva del discurso social.

Todas las profesiones fueron creadas para resolver un problema concreto. Si, simplificando, los periodistas y los medios se especializaron en producir y distribuir contenidos (al punto que hasta los modelos de negocios están atados a la distribución) para sociedades con una vida cotidiana compuesta por tiempo abundante y escasez informativa, cómo se reorganiza la industria ante la amateurización masiva (¿e irreversible?) de la producción, publicación y distribución.

Pablo Mancini, en Si no se propaga se pudre, recomienda del Convergence Culture Consortium una propuesta para ir ajustando profesiones e industria a la situación actual: If It Doesn’t Spread, It’s Dead: Creating Value in a Spreadable Marketplace (.pdf). Siguiendo a Henry Jenkins, Cristobal Mancini recomienda algo así como aflojarnos camisa y corbata a la hora de hablar de calidad y del resto de los valores contemporáneos en la comunicación actual en redes masivas.

Compartir datos. Gran proyecto. Pero ¿con los datos podemos quedar tranquilos? Mira que hay aparente transparencia que sólo es eso estadística o dato en apariencia.

Lo hablaba ayer con @nuriax y hoy lo leo en @fernand0: ¿los datos nos hacen más libres?

Por supuesto, que sí, la información nos hace algo más libres. Pero no automáticamente. Tenemos que saber leer y componer los datos. Disponer de datos es sólo el comienzo de la información. La capacitación para seguirlos teniendo, componiendo y leyendo es una de las tareas del ser humano hoy.

El texto que sugirió a Fernando Tricas es  When It Comes to Open Data, Is Transparency Enough? un resumen de una intervención de Danah Boyd (también hay vídeo)