Post on 22-May-2020
How Do Experts Use Digitized Photographs?
Theory Development on Users and Use
Paul ConwayUniversity of Michigan
Presentation ElementsPresentation ElementsResearch questions
Study populationStudy population
Initial findingsExpertiseExpertise
Modes of inquiry
Material/visual
Implications for practice
Thanks to the National Science Foundation for funding supportThanks to the National Science Foundation for funding support,the Library of Congress Prints and Photographs Division, and UM doctoral student Ricardo Punzalan, who conducted phase one interviews.
11 Aug 2009SAA Research Forum2
Research QuestionsResearch QuestionsWhat is the nature of visual expertise?
What is the relative importance of visual content What is the relative importance of visual content versus technical properties in determining use?
What is the archival nature of digital surrogates?g g
Theory development [Yeo 2008]y pEmbedding and perceiving information quality dimensions in digitized collections [information products]
Ad i th f hi l lit [b d bj ]Advancing theory of archival quality [boundary objects]
11 Aug 2009SAA Research Forum3
Method of InvestigationMethod of InvestigationParticipant identificationPhase one interviews [45 min. each][45 ]Collection and user project contextual dataPhase two interviews [2-1/2 hours each]
I d thIn-depthSemi-structuredOn-site
Grounded theory analysis of transcriptsIterative assumption testing
Please attend the poster session this afternoon for more information.
11 Aug 2009SAA Research Forum4
ExpertiseExpertiseBased on Medieval guild hierarchies, an expert is: “ the distinguished or brilliant journeyman highly regarded …the distinguished or brilliant journeyman, highly regarded by peers, whose judgments are uncommonly accurate and reliable, whose performance shows consummate skill and economy of effort and who can deal effectively with rare or economy of effort, and who can deal effectively with rare or ‘tough’ cases. Also, an expert is one who has special skills or knowledge derived from extensive experience with sub-domains ” domains.
ff l ( ) “ li i i l d f h d l i l l i ”R. Hoffman, et al., (1995) “Eliciting Knowledge from Experts: A Methodological Analysis,” Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 62 (2), 129-158.
11 Aug 20095 SAA Research Forum
Expert User CategorizationExpert User Categorization
Challenging User CategoriesChallenging User CategoriesStatus/employment orientation
Seriousness of purpose
G t t f d i i t ti S AVOCATIONGate counts for administration
Motivation [Conway 1994]
SCHOLAR AVOCATION
Motivation [Conway 1994]
Affiliation(s) [social group]
Process [inquiry method]
Product(s) [outcome]
Visually Intelligent UsersPhoto based projects
OCCUPATION
Photo-based projects
11 Aug 20096 SAA Research Forum
Interview Subjects [phase one categories]Interview Subjects [phase one categories]
Library of Congress / Prints and PhotographsUnited States based
CriteriaSignificant use [18 months] SCHOLAR AVOCATIONSignificant use [18 months]
Tangible product
SCHOLAR OC O
P2P5
P1
P7
Seven deep case studiesOCCUPATION
P6 P3
Orientation toward visual artifacts
Influences on decisions to use
OCCUPATION
P4
11 Aug 20097 SAA Research Forum
Findings: Self-Assessment of KnowledgeFindings: Self Assessment of Knowledge
Picture Domain P1 P2 P3 P4 P5 P6 P7 Mean Antique Photographic Processes Picture 2 1 1 1 3 3 1 1.7Appropriate Techniques of Chemical Analysis Picture 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1.0Characterization of Commercial Photo Materials Picture 1 2 1 2 1 1 1 1.3Documentation of Physical Condition Picture 3 1 1 2 2 1 1 1.6Optical Perspective Picture 2 1 1 2 1 1 1 1.3Physical Analysis of Photographic Types Picture 1 2 1 2 2 2 1 1.6Physical Analysis of Photographic Types Picture 1 2 1 2 2 2 1 1.6Mean 1.7 1.3 1.0 1.7 1.7 1.5 1.0 1.4Image Domain Biography of Particular Image Makers Image 3 3 3 3 3 3 2 2.9Characteristics of Particular Collections Image 3 3 2 3 3 2 1 2.4Hi t f A t I 1 1 2 2 3 2 1 1 7History of Art Image 1 1 2 2 3 2 1 1.7History of Photographic Equipment Image 2 3 3 2 2 2 1 2.1History of Photography Image 3 3 2 3 3 3 1 2.6Social History Relevant to Image Subject Image 2 3 3 3 3 3 1 2.6Working Methods of Particular Artists Image 3 3 3 3 3 3 1 2.7g gMean 2.4 2.7 2.6 2.7 2.9 2.6 1.1 2.4 Roger Bruce, “Capturing Expertise for the Evaluation of Photographs,” First Monday,
13, (4 Aug. 2008).
11 Aug 20098 SAA Research Forum
W.J.T. Mitchell. “Four Fundamental Concepts of Image Science.” In J. Elkins (ed.). Visual Literacy (Routledge, New York, 2008).
Findings: Modes of Inquiry [phase two categories]
Discovering [visual detail] [P1, P4, P5, P7]
V. Unknown, unseen, unappreciated
Findings: Modes of Inquiry [phase two categories]
LANDSCAPINGSTORYTELLING
P2 PV. Unknown, unseen, unappreciated
T. Ultra high quality; camera negatives
A. Intrinsic qualities [reliability] of record
P4P5
P1
P2
P6
P3
DISCOVERING
P4 P7
11 Aug 20099 SAA Research Forum
Findings: Modes of Inquiry [phase two categories]
Storytelling [composition] [P1, P2, P3, P5, P6]
V. Narrative of scene’s composition
Findings: Modes of Inquiry [phase two categories]
LANDSCAPINGSTORYTELLING
P2 PV. Narrative of scene s composition
T. Derived descriptive metadata
A. Image as authentic record
P4P5
P1
P2
P6
P3
DISCOVERING
P4 P7
11 Aug 200910 SAA Research Forum
Findings: Modes of Inquiry [phase two categories]
Landscaping [context] [P2, P5, P4]
V. Geographical and temporal context
Findings: Modes of Inquiry [phase two categories]
LANDSCAPINGSTORYTELLING
P2 PV. Geographical and temporal context
T. Object sequencing; structural metadata
A. Information beyond the image
P4P5
P1
P2
P6
P3
DISCOVERING
P4 P7
11 Aug 200911 SAA Research Forum
Findings: View of Digital Surrogate Findings: View of Digital Surrogate
P3Materialist [picture domain]LANDSCAPING
STORYTELLINGP4
P5
P2
P6
• values derived from source• point two• point three
DISCOVERING
P
P1
P
Visualist [image domain]• value derived from system• point two• point three P4 P7• point three
Materialist Visualist
Surrogate isphys. memory
Surrogate isimaginary
Surrogate istranscendent imaginary
11 Aug 200912 SAA Research Forum
Implications for Practice: Building & UsingImplications for Practice: Building & UsingSelection: Comprehensive, cohesive, collaborative
Digitization: Masters derivatives and versionsDigitization: Masters, derivatives, and versions
Metadata: Derived trumps applied metadata
Interface: Beyond search to navigationInterface: Beyond search to navigation
Interface: Tools for personal information management g
Interface: Tap user knowledge
Archival properties of digitized records
User perspective on archival values
11 Aug 200913 SAA Research Forum
The Legacy of Digitization?
The New Yorker, June 25, 2007. Artist: Lee Lorenz. ID: 124060.
The Legacy of Digitization?
11 Aug 2009SAA Research Forum14
“I aspired to authenticity, but I never got beyond verisimilitude.”
THANK YOU FOR YOUR ATTENTION.
Paul Conway
University of Michigan
References [1]References [1]Bovee, M., et al. (2003). “A Conceptual Framework and Belief-Function Approach to Assessing Overall Information Quality.” International Journal of Intelligent Systems18 (1): 51-74. B R ( 8) “C t i E ti f th E l ti f Ph t h ” Fi t Bruce, R. (2008). “Capturing Expertise for the Evaluation of Photographs,” First Monday, 13, (4 Aug). Cameron, F. (2007). “Beyond the Cult of the Replicant: Museums and Historical Digital Objects – Traditional Concerns, New Discourses.” In Theorizing Digital Cultural Heritage: A Critical Discourse, ed. by F. Cameron & S. Kenderdine, pp. 49-g , y , pp 4975. Cambridge: MIT Press.Charmaz, K. (2006). Constructing Grounded Theory: A Practical Guide Through Qualitative Analysis. London: Sage.Conway , P. (1994). Partners in Research: Toward Enhanced Access to the Nation's A hi A h f h i l A hi i b h A hi d Archive: A Report on the Users of the National Archives. Pittsburgh: Archives and Museum Informatics.Conway, P. (2008). “Best Practices for Digitizing Photographs: A Network Analysis of Influences.” Proceedings of IS&T’s Archiving 2008, Imaging Science & Technology, Berne, Switzerland, June 24-27. Berne, Switzerland, June 24 27. Conway, P. (2009). “Image Quality and End-User Decision Making.” Proceedings of IS&T’s Archiving 2009, Imaging Science & Technology, Arlington, VA, May 4-7.Conway, P. (2009). “Building Meaning in Digitized Photographs.” Proceedings of the Chicago Colloquium on Digital Humanities and Computer Science 1.
11 Aug 2009SAA Research Forum16
g q g p
References [2]References [2]Hoffman, R., et al. (1995). “Eliciting Knowledge from Experts: A Methodological Analysis,” Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 62 (2), 129-158.
Knight S (2008) User Perceptions of Information Quality in World Wide Web Knight, S. (2008). User Perceptions of Information Quality in World Wide Web Information Retrieval Behaviour. Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation, Edith Cowan University.
Koltun, L. (1999). “The Promise and Threat of Digital Options in an Archival Age.” A hi i (S i ) Archivaria 47 (Spring): 114-135.
Marchionini, G. (2003). “The People in Digital Libraries: Multifaceted Approaches to Assessing Needs and Impact.” In Ann Peterson Bishop, et al. Digital Library Use: Social Practice in Design and Evaluation, pp. 119-160. Cambridge: MIT Press. g , pp 9 g
Mitchell, W.J.T. (2003). “The Work of Art in the Age of Biocybernetic Reproduction.” Modernism/modernity 10 (3): 481-500.
Mitchell, W.J.T. (2008). “Four Fundamental Concepts of Image Science.” In J. Elkins ( d ) Vi l Lit N Y k R tl d (ed.). Visual Literacy. New York: Routledge.
11 Aug 2009SAA Research Forum17
References [3] References [3] Saracevic, T. (2004). How Were Digital Libraries Evaluated? Paper first presented at the DELOS WP7 Workshop on the Evaluation of Digital Libraries, p. 9. http://dlib.ionio.gr/p // g /
Sassoon, J. (2004). “Photographic Materiality in the Age of Digital Reproduction.” In E. Edwards, ed., Photographs, Objects, Histories, 186-202. London: Routledge.
Wang, R.Y. and Strong, D.M. (1996). “Beyond Accuracy: What Data Quality Means to D C ” J l f M I f i S (S i ) Data Consumers.” Journal of Management Information Systems 12 (Spring): 5-34.
Yeo, G. (2008). “Concepts of Record (2): Prototypes and Boundary Objects.” American Archivist 71 (Spring/Sum): 118-43.
11 Aug 2009SAA Research Forum18