Ever noticed how most behavioral research is based on studies of Western, upper-middle-class, undergraduate university students? If you, like me, are American, it might never occur to you to wonder whether those results can really be generalized to describe the behavior of "people." After reading The weirdest people in the world? (Western, Educated, Industrialized, Rich and Democratic (WEIRD)), you may want to go back through your favorite studies on decision-making, collaboration, cognition, and symbol interpretation and question your first read.
Tuesday, March 27, 2012
No, you’re weird
This paper also has pretty much the best opening paragraph of any academic paper ever. Fair warning: it's not SFW.
Thursday, March 22, 2012
Where’s Gringo?
Because Americans are so geographically isolated, we are often less aware of the signature quirks of our own culture and perspective than are (say) people from patchwork continents like Africa, South America, Europe, The Artist Formerly Known as the Soviet
Union, etc. Our biases hide in plain sight. For a dose of cultural perspective from the comfort of your own beanbag chair, do not miss American Cultural Patterns. I’m told this tiny little book was written as culture-shock prep for undergraduates who were entering the Peace Corps, and were traveling overseas for the first time. It delves deeply into kernel-level cultural assumptions about communication, values, morality, the perception of time and causality - the list goes on. In my experience, reading any three pages of this book provokes an hour of fascinated discussion over the late-night-coffee of your choice.
Statistics in Plain English
Yesterday I picked up Statistics in Plain English, by Timothy C. Urdan, and I tell ya I can't put it down. From my review:
I think I can say, without fear of hyperbole, that this is the best math book in the history of the entire universe. The fact that there are only six reviews of the book so far, instead of six hundred, hints at the fundamental problem I personally see in math education: it looks harder than it is because we communicate so poorly about it. Urdan communicates clearly and naturally, so the chilly math textbook mystique drops away, and you are left with a functional vocabulary of basic stats techniques.
Urdan starts with the assumption that all humans can understand and benefit from statistical techniques. By assuming that, he makes it true. He not only defines every term and every symbol he uses -- which is already amazing -- but the new terms and definitions are summarized at the end of each chapter. He lays out lots of context and many straightforward and interesting examples. The chapters are short, which gives you a nice feeling of accomplishment and plenty of breaks to think. He even humanizes the experience by speaking in the first person, expressing personal preferences, and even cracking the occasional joke. It's like talking about math over tea with a good friend.
In the modern data space, there's a great shortage of people who have a comfortable intuition for stats. If this book were in every undergraduate class, I'd wager that shortage would just go away.
Monday, March 19, 2012
Perception of self-efficacy, and technology for developing countries
Kentaro Toyama, assistant director of Microsoft Research India, has spent a lot of time thinking about how to use technology to change social systems. He's focused on using technology to further development in rural India (ICT4D, or Information & Communications Technology for Developing Countries). He published a very cool set of essays in The Atlantic in 2011 about the topic. I've been thinking about them ever since. Check 'em out.
Kentaro talks about technology as basically an amplifier for people's will. Don't let the "virtue" language deter you; fully unpacked, it's a pretty loaded concept.
Sunday, March 18, 2012
Why you need an excellent data scientist
The data science hiring space in a nutshell:
Data geeks are a hot commodity. Why?
Data is piling up around the industry's ears. We humans are suddenly generating a mountainous drift of accumulating data, growing exponentially, that nobody anticipated having. That mountain is filled with profitable, scientific gems that we are just beginning to learn how to mine out.
The market is unprepared for the demand. Even with the rush to train data miners, the market isn't coming close to keeping up with the pace of the data mountain's growth. Folks like me are hounded by recruiters; folks with +5 years data mining experience/ education are actively stalked.
Data science salaries are growing. The supply/demand disparity is driving up salaries. According to one survey, in 2010, the average data miner salary in the US was $103k; in 2011, it was $113k.
So if professional data miners are so hard to get, why do you need one of us?
[Your Company Here] needs an excellent data scientist. If humans use your digital product, your company is already generating an enormous quantity of ultra-rich data. Based on that fact alone, I can make the following safe bets:
Your data is buggy. No matter how good your testing is, there will be bugs. The bigger the data, the badder the bugs. You are going to need a data analyst who can identify dirty data, scope the damage, and prescribe a solution. Skip that, and risk spending months acting on an interesting data trend that, in the end, describes nothing but a broken javascript call. I've seen it happen over and over.
Remember, the driver is as important as the car. If you want to make the best use of your BI application, your organization needs the right people to exploit it. BI is not just about reporting and visualization anymore. It involves intensive and creative analysis, along with data management, to create value for an organization. - Got BI? Now You Need to Hire a Data Geek. Here’s What to Look For.
Hal Varian, Google’s Chief Economist, was interviewed a few months ago, and said the following in the McKinsey Quarterly: “The sexy job in the next ten years will be statisticians… The ability to take data—to be able to understand it, to process it, to extract value from it, to visualize it, to communicate it—that’s going to be a hugely important skill.” - The Three Sexy Skills of Data Geeks
Data geeks are a hot commodity. Why?
Data is piling up around the industry's ears. We humans are suddenly generating a mountainous drift of accumulating data, growing exponentially, that nobody anticipated having. That mountain is filled with profitable, scientific gems that we are just beginning to learn how to mine out.
The market is unprepared for the demand. Even with the rush to train data miners, the market isn't coming close to keeping up with the pace of the data mountain's growth. Folks like me are hounded by recruiters; folks with +5 years data mining experience/ education are actively stalked.
CNN coverage: Companies that want to make sense of all their bits and bytes are hiring so-called data scientists - if they can find any. [...] A recent report from the McKinsey Global Institute says that by 2018 the U.S. could face a shortage of up to 190,000 workers with analytical skills.
So if professional data miners are so hard to get, why do you need one of us?
[Your Company Here] needs an excellent data scientist. If humans use your digital product, your company is already generating an enormous quantity of ultra-rich data. Based on that fact alone, I can make the following safe bets:
Your data is buggy. No matter how good your testing is, there will be bugs. The bigger the data, the badder the bugs. You are going to need a data analyst who can identify dirty data, scope the damage, and prescribe a solution. Skip that, and risk spending months acting on an interesting data trend that, in the end, describes nothing but a broken javascript call. I've seen it happen over and over.
Skill #2: Data Munging (Suffering). The second critical skill mentioned above is “data munging.” Among data geek circles, this refers to the painful process of cleaning, parsing, and proofing one’s data before it’s suitable for analysis. Real world data is messy. - The Three Sexy Skills of Data Geeks
Your data has a fluid architecture. As time moves on, your product evolves. Add a new option? Remove a feature? Need to view user behavior through a whole new lens? Like it or not, you have to change your data architecture while it is live. Every time that happens, you add more complexity. You need an analyst who can keep up with that.
Your data has, or should have, journeyman-level richness. If you send an apprentice-level data-miner into that trove, you're going to come out with a handful of iron ore. You can hire an apprentice analyst to run the queries you specify and graph them. You can't hire a apprentice to ask big, hot, actionable, counter-intuitive questions. Those questions grow out of an elbows-deep daily dialogue with your data set, composed of statistics and good old-fashioned nerdly zeal. If you want the gems out of that mine, you need a real industry-level data miner.
With big data comes big headaches; also big, big opportunity for a reputation for genius product development. If your analyst can't handle the big hairy real-world data mess, or doesn't know statistical relevance from a hole in the wall, you get bunk analysis. If your analyst just plain isn't that into it, you will get shallow, token inquiry. If your analyst is a passionate data/social science geek, you get game-changing analysis, and stand to score media-worthy customer relationship coups.
Your data has, or should have, journeyman-level richness. If you send an apprentice-level data-miner into that trove, you're going to come out with a handful of iron ore. You can hire an apprentice analyst to run the queries you specify and graph them. You can't hire a apprentice to ask big, hot, actionable, counter-intuitive
With big data comes big headaches; also big, big opportunity for a reputation for genius product development. If your analyst can't handle the big hairy real-world data mess, or doesn't know statistical relevance from a hole in the wall, you get bunk analysis. If your analyst just plain isn't that into it, you will get shallow, token inquiry. If your analyst is a passionate data/social science geek, you get game-changing analysis, and stand to score media-worthy customer relationship coups.
Wednesday, May 21, 2008
Ruthbert
Note: If you are looking at this blog for serious professional reasons, and only want to see the non-silly entries, skip this one.
Welcome to the next episode of Ruthbert, wherein two non-colocated sardonic female information workers search for life, love, meaning, and original puns about bears.
K2: I spelled "for example" as "for exmaple"
this particular field goes out to all of you ex maples out there
don't ever go back, man
Ruth: snort
K2: Oh god, I'm sorry for this:
"I know you're pining away.... but don't fall off the wagon"
Ruth: NO
K2: "I'm not ON the wagon, man. I AM the wagon"
Ruth: NO K2 that's a BAD K2
K2: HA
HA HA
Ruth: now you go to your room and THINK about what you did
Ruth's statuses for April 08:
Ruth: travel doctor? is that like a miniature version of a doctor, that comes in a plastic carrying case?
K2: it's nice because he's magnetic on the bottom and doesn't tip over
Ruth: makes it harder to lose him under the seat, too
K2: sometimes you drop him and find him sticking perpendicular out of the gearshift
Ruth status: "whipped topping" is a phrase disturbing in its vagueness
K2 status: Officemate: What would you do without me? Me: I don’t know! Probably become a Pollyanna optimist with nothing but hope for the future and respect for Microsoft products. Officemate: I doubt that.
K2: crashed
Ruth: oh, that's no good
K2: I would like to drive a requirement into today's Ruth Release
it's a pry 2, but will support many other releases
it's called: More Talking
you'll note if you take a look at the process workflows that we would like at least 15 Funny Jokes included in this piece of functionality
Ruth: I don't know if 15 Funny Jokes is a realistic expectation of deliverables this late in the Release
what are your KPIs for the jokes?
K2: well
we're measuring them by funny sounds
like "ingers" and "oogle"
that's going to have the greatest customer satisfaction impact
"eezle"
also references to bears
Ruth: Those success metrics sound reasonable
here is my counter-proposal:
I should be able to get you 10 Funny Jokes by EOD
Ruth: we can push the remaining 5 out to tomorrow's release
K2: hmm
Ruth: and supplement in the meantime with Talking About Boys
K2: iiiinteresting
Ruth: my research has shown that customers respond almost as well to Talking About Boys
but admittedly, the sample size is small
K2: that may be bad news to our Future Humor Writers of America division, but the 13 Year Old Girl stakeholder group has been trying to push that change request through forever
I think we can ship this one
I crashed again
K2: my midday lonesomes are hitting
Ruth: you are not alone
you are at Microsoft
Steve Ballmer is probably spying on you right now
K2: it's going to be cloudy all weekend
but warm
Ruth: it better not hail
K2: I screwed up and scheduled a bunch of meetings for Memorial Day because nobody had blocked it off
including me
Ruth: oopsie
K2: this is how I covered my tracks: "On second thought, I'm going to declare Monday Memorial Day and give all of you guys the day off. No need to thank me. "
I have godlike powers
this is why it's valid and useful for you to bring your concerns about hail straight to me
Ruth: cows
I am wearing jeans yay!
K2: ME TOO
Ruth: yay
K2: that's why we're friends
Ruth: does that mean we're only friends on fridays?
K2: yes
UNLESS
you are ALSO usually wearing something that I also am usually wearing
like shoes
we could base our friendship on shoes
Ruth: or a bra
or an air of superiority
Welcome to the next episode of Ruthbert, wherein two non-colocated sardonic female information workers search for life, love, meaning, and original puns about bears.
K2: I spelled "for example" as "for exmaple"
this particular field goes out to all of you ex maples out there
don't ever go back, man
Ruth: snort
K2: Oh god, I'm sorry for this:
"I know you're pining away.... but don't fall off the wagon"
Ruth: NO
K2: "I'm not ON the wagon, man. I AM the wagon"
Ruth: NO K2 that's a BAD K2
K2: HA
HA HA
Ruth: now you go to your room and THINK about what you did
Ruth's statuses for April 08:
- One two three o'clock four o'clock BARACK
- Solid as Barack
- Barack-a-bye baby, in the treetop, when the wind blows the cradle will Barack
- We built this city on Barack and roll
- Hush little baby don't say a word, Obama's gonna buy you a Barackingbird
- Walk this way, Barack this way
- Barack me Amadeus
Ruth: travel doctor? is that like a miniature version of a doctor, that comes in a plastic carrying case?
K2: it's nice because he's magnetic on the bottom and doesn't tip over
Ruth: makes it harder to lose him under the seat, too
K2: sometimes you drop him and find him sticking perpendicular out of the gearshift
Ruth status: "whipped topping" is a phrase disturbing in its vagueness
K2 status: Officemate: What would you do without me? Me: I don’t know! Probably become a Pollyanna optimist with nothing but hope for the future and respect for Microsoft products. Officemate: I doubt that.
K2: crashed
Ruth: oh, that's no good
K2: I would like to drive a requirement into today's Ruth Release
it's a pry 2, but will support many other releases
it's called: More Talking
you'll note if you take a look at the process workflows that we would like at least 15 Funny Jokes included in this piece of functionality
Ruth: I don't know if 15 Funny Jokes is a realistic expectation of deliverables this late in the Release
what are your KPIs for the jokes?
K2: well
we're measuring them by funny sounds
like "ingers" and "oogle"
that's going to have the greatest customer satisfaction impact
"eezle"
also references to bears
Ruth: Those success metrics sound reasonable
here is my counter-proposal:
I should be able to get you 10 Funny Jokes by EOD
Ruth: we can push the remaining 5 out to tomorrow's release
K2: hmm
Ruth: and supplement in the meantime with Talking About Boys
K2: iiiinteresting
Ruth: my research has shown that customers respond almost as well to Talking About Boys
but admittedly, the sample size is small
K2: that may be bad news to our Future Humor Writers of America division, but the 13 Year Old Girl stakeholder group has been trying to push that change request through forever
I think we can ship this one
I crashed again
K2: my midday lonesomes are hitting
Ruth: you are not alone
you are at Microsoft
Steve Ballmer is probably spying on you right now
K2: it's going to be cloudy all weekend
but warm
Ruth: it better not hail
K2: I screwed up and scheduled a bunch of meetings for Memorial Day because nobody had blocked it off
including me
Ruth: oopsie
K2: this is how I covered my tracks: "On second thought, I'm going to declare Monday Memorial Day and give all of you guys the day off. No need to thank me. "
I have godlike powers
this is why it's valid and useful for you to bring your concerns about hail straight to me
Ruth: cows
I am wearing jeans yay!
K2: ME TOO
Ruth: yay
K2: that's why we're friends
Ruth: does that mean we're only friends on fridays?
K2: yes
UNLESS
you are ALSO usually wearing something that I also am usually wearing
like shoes
we could base our friendship on shoes
Ruth: or a bra
or an air of superiority
Monday, May 5, 2008
Gina Neff: Work and Power
Note: I have resolved to: (1) make my posts shorter so they stop eating my life, and (2) swerve, with a deft flick of the steering wheel, from my former outline of stuff that I was going to cover, to concentrating on my "Technology as Social Intervention: Discuss" topic, where I hope to learn more and rant less. It's all the same basic subject, though, so you may not even notice the difference.
That said, I went out a few weeks ago and interviewed Gina Neff, who is faculty at the UW Department of Communication. Gina is very taken with the concept of "work and power," and I wanted to ask her: what's the connection between the two? How do organizational structures dictate how power gets allocated to its members? And what happens to those power structures-- or to the communication dynamics of the org as a whole-- when you introduce new problem-solving technologies? If you are also geeky enough to find these topics interesting, you will find some of Gina's answers to those questions in the following few blog entries.
Information, Power and Tools
Gina has been studying these type of questions for years, and she has seen organizations' implicit power structures change radically with the addition of new technological tools, "magnifying existing power disparities," she says, "or breaking them down." The power-holders in an org may try to restrict how a tool is distributed or employed, or might even rally against it, if it seems like it has the potential to redistribute the power to make things happen. Alternatively (as in the following example), it might level the playing field, causing an initial chaos that leads to large changes to the org's workflows and the way its members define their own roles.
Gina is currently undertaking a study about the adoption of building information modeling tools in the construction industry. She explains:
Heterophily: Difference and Group Intelligence
It's not far-fetched to imagine that switching the wiring in an organization's communication structure could lead to huge changes. Cultures large and small, since the civilization of man, have kept themselves alive by employing one or another form of isolation: a mountain range, a separate language, secrecy, stereotyping, a forbidding initiation rite; Jews, for example, have kept Jewish culture alive, despite the diaspora, with the aid of lengthy and complex conversion processes, services conducted entirely in Hebrew, and dietary restrictions that can help limit who Jews eat with. If you move a culture's boundary devices, you change the way the culture lives. Build a highway, raise children bilingual, install a phone system, the internet: suddenly you find cultures blending, changing, and questioning the way they do things.
The contractors and architects in the system Gina is studying have historically been heterophilious. "Heterophily" is an amusingly polysyallabic term for "different in a way that makes communication between them hard." The words heterophily and homophily describe two ends of a spectrum: on the one side, you have two groups (or individuals) who are different to the point where they can't communicate at all (an American economist and a Bolivian witch woman); on the other side, you have groups who are so similar that communication between them is easy, but totally uninteresting (an American economist and an American economist ;) ). They have nothing to say to one another that they don't already know.
Want More of This Stuff? Check out:
... Gina recommends all of the above except, technically, the following blog entry. :)
Image pulled from here.
That said, I went out a few weeks ago and interviewed Gina Neff, who is faculty at the UW Department of Communication. Gina is very taken with the concept of "work and power," and I wanted to ask her: what's the connection between the two? How do organizational structures dictate how power gets allocated to its members? And what happens to those power structures-- or to the communication dynamics of the org as a whole-- when you introduce new problem-solving technologies? If you are also geeky enough to find these topics interesting, you will find some of Gina's answers to those questions in the following few blog entries.
Information, Power and Tools
Gina has been studying these type of questions for years, and she has seen organizations' implicit power structures change radically with the addition of new technological tools, "magnifying existing power disparities," she says, "or breaking them down." The power-holders in an org may try to restrict how a tool is distributed or employed, or might even rally against it, if it seems like it has the potential to redistribute the power to make things happen. Alternatively (as in the following example), it might level the playing field, causing an initial chaos that leads to large changes to the org's workflows and the way its members define their own roles.
Gina is currently undertaking a study about the adoption of building information modeling tools in the construction industry. She explains:
Historically, contractors (the folks who build the buildings) and architects have lived on opposite sides of the organizational divide. They spoke different languages and had different goal sets; they communicated via blueprints. This mutual organizational isolation allowed each group a lot of control over their spheres, but frequently made collaboration a painful, contentious mess. Each group guards its information and works at cross-purposes to the other, with miscommunications leading to mutual stereotyping, which itself helps reinforce the divide.
Gina is studying a transition that's taking place right now, before her eyes as she studies it: Today, builders and architects are beginning to share their visions via 3-D computer graphic tools and databases that represent the building being built. In other words, these groups are adopting a communications- and design- based technological innovation, and it is creating dramatic changes in the way they work together. The stereotypes are being put to the test as the groups are forced into proximity with one another, and each silo's private language is being opened up to the other. As Gina describes: "Their entire communications infrastructure has been channeled into different visual symbols, and is hardwired through different network pathways." Each group is also, in the process, losing some of the autonomy that came with that defended isolation.
Heterophily: Difference and Group Intelligence
It's not far-fetched to imagine that switching the wiring in an organization's communication structure could lead to huge changes. Cultures large and small, since the civilization of man, have kept themselves alive by employing one or another form of isolation: a mountain range, a separate language, secrecy, stereotyping, a forbidding initiation rite; Jews, for example, have kept Jewish culture alive, despite the diaspora, with the aid of lengthy and complex conversion processes, services conducted entirely in Hebrew, and dietary restrictions that can help limit who Jews eat with. If you move a culture's boundary devices, you change the way the culture lives. Build a highway, raise children bilingual, install a phone system, the internet: suddenly you find cultures blending, changing, and questioning the way they do things.

The contractors and architects in the system Gina is studying have historically been heterophilious. "Heterophily" is an amusingly polysyallabic term for "different in a way that makes communication between them hard." The words heterophily and homophily describe two ends of a spectrum: on the one side, you have two groups (or individuals) who are different to the point where they can't communicate at all (an American economist and a Bolivian witch woman); on the other side, you have groups who are so similar that communication between them is easy, but totally uninteresting (an American economist and an American economist ;) ). They have nothing to say to one another that they don't already know.
Want More of This Stuff? Check out:
- The next blog entry and maybe the one after it, where we talk about the consequences of these sorts of changes
- The stuff coming out of the The Center for Work, Technology and Organization at Stanford.
- Sorting things out: Classification and its Consequences (Bawker and Star)
- Talking about Machines (Julian Orr)
- Human Machine Configurations: Plans and Situated Actions (Suchman)
- Cognition in the Wild (Hutchins)
... Gina recommends all of the above except, technically, the following blog entry. :)
Image pulled from here.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)