Social Computing Session 4: Social knowledge production and services

Online social recommendation systems vs. real world advice seeking

For a project for another class I have been locating materials about Geogiana, the Duchess of Devonshire. Before I complete the project I wanted to know what others thought about some of the items I have located. To that end, and for exemplars for this posting, I visited Amazon.com and BN.com to check out the customer reviews of The Duchess by Amanda Foreman. See the screenshots above. Amazon.com had more reviews available than BN.com though many of them were more like plot synopses or vague "liked it," "loved it," or "hated it" type commentary. There were a few that I found helpful with well-written, thoughful discussions with accurate spelling. I found the Detailed Ratings on BN.com very helpful because they really fleshed out what elements specifically the reviewer rated highly or poorly. Unfortunately there was only one rating/review to work with there. Amazon.com does include a tagging feature that may prove helpful as I continue to look for additional materials.

I found the article Social Annotations in Digital Library Collections particularly relevant in this case as the ratings and reviews function as a history of others responses to and interests in the text. While they are not page or even chapter specific, these recommendations can help a user decide whether or not an item is relevant and/or worthwhile for whatever purpose. Also, both Amazon and BN offer "people who bought this also bought" features that may prove helpful in finding additional related materials. Kristina Lerman's article about filtering also applies to some degree...BN.com provides both collaborative and social filtering elements for users of MyB&N. Unfortunately, my research in this area has been very recent and the system is designed to filter based on my overall use and therefore has not provided any additional recommendations for me. We'll see how long it takes the system to catch up with my new interest...if it does at all.

The trust issues discussed in previous sessions came to the fore while I was looking for reviews...how does one determine whether or not a review is trustworthy? This is especially true when one is looking for research materials.

So, in comparison, and also in search of a review I can trust, I spoke with a writer friend who recently began researching Georgiana for her book. I've known her for years and trust her ability to critically analyze material. Her comments about this book were in line with some of the reviews available online, but since I know her, her background, and her abilities I am more inclined to view her review and reviews that are similar more favorably. I also emailed an old history professor whose research included the era of Georgiana, though I have not received any details back yet.

Overall, I found this week's readings varied and interesting. I am particularly excited aboutthe potential future of libraries as they continue to adapt to mobile communications and the changing social needs and ideas. If our library database incorporated "annotations," or reviews by registered users, tagging, or other social computing and knowledge-sharing elements I would be ecstatic! I personally find research rather lonely and sometimes do not trust my own analysis...having a social history in this environment would make for more interesting research. At the moment, one can accomplish some connection by using bibliographic references, who has used what in what context and when...but the speed and variety allowed by the elements discussed in this week's readings allow for many more connections and discussions. As always, quality is a concern when allowing ratings, reviews, tagging, and other "unregulated" social elements, but if the system incorporated elements of social capital allowing these elements and the users themselves to be rated and reviewed, then perhaps the quality and trustworthiness could be analyzed with some degree of reliability.