Comments on: What does getting smarter really mean?

By: Shey’s MonthCap - 09/08 | introspective snapshots

Shey’s MonthCap - 09/08 | introspective snapshots — Wed, 01 Oct 2008 11:44:10 +0000

[...] What does getting smarter really mean? [...]

By: Mark Dykeman

Mark Dykeman — Mon, 01 Sep 2008 20:56:28 +0000

Sure, why not? As long as you don't need blood and sleep deprivation isn't involved. You can reach me at contact AT broadcasting-brain DOT com.

By: bmevans

bmevans — Mon, 01 Sep 2008 20:15:33 +0000

Being objective is definitely hard, whether you are an active participant of the thing you study or not. There are some things you can only experience from participating yourself, though. And after that, I try to consider the behavior I observe from many different perspectives (and academic theories)...

In other words, yes, it's hard, but it's better than the alternative, I think!

(Do you want to participate in a study?)

By: Mark Dykeman

Mark Dykeman — Mon, 01 Sep 2008 20:10:57 +0000

Out of curiosity, does participation in these sites make your research more difficult? Isn't it harder to be objective?

By: bmevans

bmevans — Mon, 01 Sep 2008 19:44:05 +0000

Friendfeed *is* interesting because people can dive deeper into topics through threaded discussions. It's definitely a site I'm hoping to study further for its “sensemaking” capabilities. (And of course, I participate on these social media sites myself!)

By: Mark Dykeman

Mark Dykeman — Mon, 01 Sep 2008 19:32:11 +0000

Hello Brynn and thanks for stopping by. I suspected this topic would right up your alley based on what I read at your blog. A number of my readers and social media contacts dive frequently and sometimes deeply into social media streams. FriendFeed is a central place where many streams of data converge via RSS feed aggregation, but you're probably already aware of that.

Your point about being willing to put in time and effort to make productive use of these tools is well taken.

By: bmevans

bmevans — Mon, 01 Sep 2008 19:27:15 +0000

I work in a group at PARC is called “Augmented Social Cognition” and it's all about building technology (or web-based tools) that facilitate some aspects of cognition—in some ways, to make you “smarter.” But that's not exactly the best term (as other commenters have discussed). Working hard or actually incorporating new ideas into your thinking is often what we mean by “smart” here.

Instead, my research has been focused on understanding how people find and synthesize new information (perform “sensemaking”) because of its availability on new websites or through social interactions online. My instinct is that new web tools have the ability to augment human cognition but only where individuals are willing to put the time and effort in to make use of the new-found information. Maybe this makes us “smarter” or maybe it simply makes easier to find relevant information.

Playing the definition game can be tricky if you never make any headway. But I certainly like the discussion of what it means to be “smarter” because of social media.

By: Mark Dykeman

Mark Dykeman — Mon, 01 Sep 2008 18:24:57 +0000

Excellent point about hard work!

By: Mark Dykeman

Mark Dykeman — Mon, 01 Sep 2008 18:24:16 +0000

For the record, I've tried to indicate above that Robert and Jeremiah are both very bright guys. They are certainly becoming more knowledgeable and probably wiser through their reading, but I think they are both at the point where this activity by itself won't make them any smarter.

By: Mark Dykeman

Mark Dykeman — Mon, 01 Sep 2008 18:13:58 +0000

If I understand you correctly, being “smart” has a lot to do with skill and ability and I would agree.