Archive

Posts Tagged ‘summary’

Web Credibility – Anticipated Issues (Item 1 / Q3 Summary)

November 3, 2012 Leave a comment

Fogg’s (2003) studies on web credibility from 1999 to 2002 have shown that the general website user has become more self-aware of the content that he/she may be reading or using in their research. Fogg shows a comparison sheet, comparing the trustworthiness elements that increase web credibility. One of the comparisons show that in 1999, the site that lists their organization’s physical address has a +2.0 rating of web credibility. In 2002, it’s been decreased down to +1.7. I’ll explain in dot points some of the reasons why people have become more aware and demanding of web credibility and some anticipated issues we could possibly see in the future in regards to credibility on the world-wide-web.

  • Figure 1: Facebook Logo (Source: Blue Out Pen State, 2012)

    The kids of this generation are being brought up with this type of technology and usability. They’re using mainstream sites like Facebook, Myspace & Twitter. Through these mainstream websites, people can supply links to information. People can ‘like’ links that are sent around the web, so people would misinterpret the popular links with the most likes as the ‘correct’ information, which could very well be completely inaccurate information.

  • The increased amount of articles lurking around the world-wide-web by supposed ‘journalists’ may have some correct information, but some articles are riddled with spelling mistakes and grammar errors, which could possibly indicate that the person’s article may not be completely true.
  • The reason behind the increased sighting of spelling mistakes and grammar errors could be due to the internet surpassing the ‘newspaper’ in delivering news. Every journalist and writer on the world-wide-web are keyboard-ready when it comes to news, so it’s all a matter of being first to deliver information, never-minding if the information is credible or not, and because they want to publish first, won’t scan their article as thoroughly as would professional editors apart of a newspaper or magazine agency.
Advertisements

Performance Load Analysis (Item 1 / Q1 Summary)

November 2, 2012 Leave a comment

Figure 1: Human Brain Evolution (Source: Mobile Phone Talk, 2010)

A brief summary of Lidwell, Holden & Butler’s (2003) extract on ‘Performance Load‘ explains that to accomplish a goal, we must use a large degree of mental and physical activity, which in this case, is called Performance Load. If we increase our performance load, there will be a large chance of errors and damage to the performance time, and completion of the goal will be significantly decreased. If we decrease our performance load, they’ll be a significant chance of successfully completing your goal and a minimal chance of error. The two (2) performance loads are; Cognitive Load, which is the use of mental activity, and Kinematic Load, which is the use of physical activity.

Lidwell, Holden & Butler’s (2003) example of Cognitive Load is the use of computers. Many years ago, “early computer systems required users to remember large sets of commands, and then type them into the computer in specific ways.” But now days, we have ‘bar codes’ and ‘scanners’ that can simply be scanned into the computer, this reduces the performance load and decreases the possibility of errors. An extract from Malamed’s (2012) on Cognitive Load explains “[…] the part of our brain that consciously processes information, dominates everything we do in terms of learning.”

– – –

Lidwell, W., Holden, K., & Butler, J. (2003). Aesthetic-Usability Effect. In Universal Principles of Design. (pp. 148-149).

Malamed, C. (2012). The eLearning Coach. What is cognitive load? Retrieved from http://theelearningcoach.com/learning/what-is-cognitive-load/