Broadening Exposure, Questioning Opinions, and Reading Patterns with Reflext: a Computational Support for Frame Reflection

Baumer, Eric P. S.; Cipriani, Claire; Davis, Mitchell; He, Gary J.; Kang, James M.; Jeffrey-Wilensky, Jaclyn; Lee, Jinjoo; Zupnick, Justin Adam

doi:10.1080/19331681.2013.872072

Cited by 8 publications

(7 citation statements)

References 39 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…However, we stopped short of ascribing any particular meaning or interpretation to those patterns, leaving that task in the hands of those using the system. This approach resulted in an interactive text visualization called Reflext (Baumer et al, 2014b). This section first presents a technical overview of how Reflext works, then describes a subset of users' experiences that arose during our roughly six-month field trial of the tool.…”

Section: Frame Reflection On Action: Reflextmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Participatory design has as established history, both in technology design and elsewhere (Ehn, 1988;Muller and Druin, 2012;Muller and Kuhn, 1993). Using data from the same field study (Baumer et al, 2014b), this section describes both some potential challenges and unique opportunities with participatory approaches.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Thus, speculative approaches may provide a means of overcoming how we currently conceive of algorithmically based systems. Drawing on insights from a field study led by the author (Baumer et al, 2014b), the paper will describe how speculative design (Baumer et al, 2014a;Bleecker, 2009;Blythe, 2014;Dunne and Raby, 2013;Linehan et al, 2014;Sterling, 2005;Tanenbaum, 2014) can be used to explore various alternatives for living with algorithms.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Toward human-centered algorithm design

Baumer

2017

Big Data & Society

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

As algorithms pervade numerous facets of daily life, they are incorporated into systems for increasingly diverse purposes. These systems' results are often interpreted differently by the designers who created them than by the lay persons who interact with them. This paper offers a proposal for human-centered algorithm design, which incorporates human and social interpretations into the design process for algorithmically based systems. It articulates three specific strategies for doing so: theoretical, participatory, and speculative. Drawing on the author's work designing and deploying multiple related systems, the paper provides a detailed example of using a theoretical approach. It also discusses findings pertinent to participatory and speculative design approaches. The paper addresses both strengths and challenges for each strategy in helping to center the process of designing algorithmically based systems around humans.

show abstract

Section: Frame Reflection On Action: Reflextmentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Toward human-centered algorithm design

Baumer

2017

Big Data & Society

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…This tension is unsurprising, given that existing work suggests that an increasingly critical engagement with broadcast media is premised on a level of interaction with them that goes beyond the passive reception of TV shows and their related user-generated content. As Baumer et al [4] note, when confronted with a morass of different and competing standpoints on a socio-political issue (such as with unfiltered social media feeds), it may be difficult to even identify and situate your own opinions within the wider debate. For designs that utilise social sharing of data, this is significant because it shows, in the context of polarising reality TV, that social tagging moves beyond simple annotation of content towards critical/reflective thinking around the users own viewpoints.…”

Section: Critical Reflection and Co-viewingmentioning

confidence: 99%

"I've been manipulated!"

Feltwell

Wood

Long

et al. 2017

Proceedings of the 2017 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The recent proliferation of a reality TV genre that focusses on welfare recipients has led to concerns that prime-time media experiences are exacerbating misconceptions, and stifling critical debate, around major societal issues such as welfare reform and poverty. Motivated by arguments that 'second screening' practices offer opportunities to engage viewers with issues of political concern, we describe the design and evaluation of two smartphone apps that facilitate and promote more critical live-viewing of reality TV. Our apps, Spotting Guide and Moral Compass, encourage users to identify, categorise, tag and filter patterns and tropes within reality TV, as well as reinterpret social media posts associated with their broadcast. We show that such interactions encourage critical thinking around typical editing and production techniques and foster co-discussion and reflection amongst viewers. We discuss, more broadly, how these interactions encourage users to identify the wider consequences and framings of reality TV, and offer implications and considerations for design that provokes criticality and reflection in second screening contexts.

show abstract

“…In contrast to traditional data visualization, the design sought not to provide an overview of what is being said but rather how things are being said, i.e., to encourage attention to and reflection on how issues are "framed" [17,13]. In addition to lab studies and focus groups [37], this system was deployed in a field study, during which the tool was used for at least 8 weeks by regular readers of political news coverage during the 2012 U.S. election campaign [8]. The evaluation sought to assess the tool's capacity for supporting frame reflection [39], the ways that users integrated tool use with their existing reading practices, and broader issues in how participants interpreted the computational analysis and visualization.…”

Section: Designing For Frame Reflectionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Double Binds and Double Blinds: Evaluation Tactics in Critically Oriented HCI

Khovanskaya

Baumer

Sengers

2015

AAHCC

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Critically oriented researchers within Human-Computer Interaction (HCI) have fruitfully intersected design and critical analysis to engage users and designers in reflection on underlying values, assumptions and dominant practices in technology. To successfully integrate this work within the HCI community, critically oriented researchers have tactically engaged with dominant practices within HCI in the design and evaluation of their work. This paper draws attention to the ways that tactical engagement with aspects of HCI evaluation methodology shapes and bears consequences for critically oriented research. We reflect on three of our own experiences evaluating critically oriented designs and trace challenges that we faced to the ways that sensibilities about generalizable knowledge are manifested in HCI evaluation methodology. Drawing from our own experiences, as well as other influential critically oriented design projects in HCI, we articulate some of the trade-offs involved in consciously adopting or not adopting certain normative aspects of HCI evaluation. We argue that some forms of this engagement can hamstring researchers from pursuing their intended research goals and have consequences beyond specific research projects to affect the normative discourse in the field as a whole.

show abstract

Broadening Exposure, Questioning Opinions, and Reading Patterns with Reflext: a Computational Support for Frame Reflection

Cited by 8 publications

References 39 publications

Toward human-centered algorithm design

Toward human-centered algorithm design

"I've been manipulated!"

Double Binds and Double Blinds: Evaluation Tactics in Critically Oriented HCI

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About