Social networks

[Charles Burnette]

Dear Colleagues:

Those interested in the power, effects and uses of social networks  
should be interested in the following:

http://scienceblogs.com/cortex/?utm_source=bloglist&utm_medium=dropdown

(You can also reach this through scienceblogs.com then choose the blog  
The Frontal Cortex)

The post by Jonah Lehrer was titled Social Determinism and posted  
September 28, 2009.  Be sure to click on the highlighted essay to  
access the original story about the Framingham Study.  Well worth it.

Chuck

[Kevin Hilton-5]

Hi Chuck

An interesting article, and it raises a good point that we should see
things from the positive flip-side more often. However, the fact is that
our behavioural processes include conserving energy (reducing mental and
physical effort) e.g. by the devaluing of proposed change, or by more
creative delegation of the required effort. Why change if we can just go
with the flow. It is easier to follow general social habits and gain a
greater sense of belonging than consider attempting something as
challenging as to change other people's behaviours and risk possible
alienation. It's not that we don't care, well some maybe, but if we
don't practice changing, or change-agency, it just seems, well, like
something best left till another day.

This is what the health and wellbeing, and the sustainability promoters
amongst us are constantly up against, in seeking to change behaviours
and develop a more realistic and responsible culture. Oh hang it, it
really is easier to keep going the way we are, in our social network,
even if we do appreciate it cannot be sustainable. It doesn't seem worth
the grief, life's too demanding as it is, with information overload and
so many choices to occupy us, and keep us distracted.

Some of us are however more confident and exercised to swim against or
across the flow, watching and looking to change and to change others,
with some successes; looking for new patterns of opportunity for change
that start off by going with the flow but become redirective. We have to
find realistic ways of 'baiting' people towards change by letting them
'pre-experience' the benefits, with benefits that outweigh the
investment in effort.

Regards

Kev

Dr. Kev Hilton
Head of Research
The Centre for Design Research
School of Design
City Campus East
Northumbria University
Newcastle upon Tyne
NE1 8ST
UK

0191 243 7340
k.hilton@...
http://northumbria.ac.uk/experts/kevinhilton


-----Original Message-----
From: PhD-Design - This list is for discussion of PhD studies and
related research in Design [mailto:PHD-DESIGN@...] On Behalf
Of Charles Burnette
Sent: 29 September 2009 15:10
To: PHD-DESIGN@...
Subject: Social networks

Dear Colleagues:

Those interested in the power, effects and uses of social networks  
should be interested in the following:

http://scienceblogs.com/cortex/?utm_source=bloglist&utm_medium=dropdown

(You can also reach this through scienceblogs.com then choose the blog  
The Frontal Cortex)

The post by Jonah Lehrer was titled Social Determinism and posted  
September 28, 2009.  Be sure to click on the highlighted essay to  
access the original story about the Framingham Study.  Well worth it.

Chuck

[Klaus Krippendorff]

dear chuck,

are you making a 180 degree turn from your early insistence on the
conception of intentional individuals to social network determinism?

stake holder network theory goes only 90 degrees from either position.  it
recognizes human agency (non-determinist design activity) within the social
constraints on what can be communicated to and inspires the stakeholders of
design who, after all, must contribute to the realization of a design.

klaus

-----Original Message-----
From: PhD-Design - This list is for discussion of PhD studies and related
research in Design [mailto:PHD-DESIGN@...] On Behalf Of Charles
Burnette
Sent: Tuesday, September 29, 2009 10:10 AM
To: PHD-DESIGN@...
Subject: Social networks

Dear Colleagues:

Those interested in the power, effects and uses of social networks should be
interested in the following:

http://scienceblogs.com/cortex/?utm_source=bloglist&utm_medium=dropdown

(You can also reach this through scienceblogs.com then choose the blog The
Frontal Cortex)

The post by Jonah Lehrer was titled Social Determinism and posted September
28, 2009.  Be sure to click on the highlighted essay to access the original
story about the Framingham Study.  Well worth it.

Chuck

[Charles Burnette]

On Sep 29, 2009, at 11:10 AM, Kevin Hilton wrote:

> This is what the health and wellbeing, and the sustainability  
> promoters
> amongst us are constantly up against, in seeking to change behaviours
> and develop a more realistic and responsible culture. Oh hang it, it
> really is easier to keep going the way we are, in our social network,
> even if we do appreciate it cannot be sustainable. It doesn't seem  
> worth
> the grief, life's too demanding as it is, with information overload  
> and
> so many choices to occupy us, and keep us distracted.
>
> Some of us are however more confident and exercised to swim against or
> across the flow, watching and looking to change and to change others,
> with some successes; looking for new patterns of opportunity for  
> change
> that start off by going with the flow but become redirective. We  
> have to
> find realistic ways of 'baiting' people towards change by letting them
> 'pre-experience' the benefits, with benefits that outweigh the
> investment in effort.

Kev: The problem is that we can no longer just go with the flow: get  
more obese when our friends do, continue to waste energy because  
others do; refuse to respond to climate change because our competitors  
don't; be as greedy as our peer group, etc. (With regard to the last  
point there is another very interesting article that goes directly to  
this social determinism. It is entitled Rational Irrationality: The  
Real Reason that Capitalism is So Crash Prone by John Cassidy in the  
current (October 5, 2009) New Yorker magazine (Newyorker.com).

There is a need for the individual willful mind open to consequences  
within every social network.  We need to reward and protect the  
whistle blowers. Think Rachel Carson, or even Teddy Roosevelt when he  
put away his rifle and dreams of empire to protect nature from its  
despoilers.

One can argue strongly, I believe, that designers have the moral  
responsibility to help every group they serve to see better  
alternatives than they might collectively do.

Chuck

[Charles Burnette]

Klaus: Don't get too excited! I'm not abandoning my position at all as  
you will see from my response to Kev Hilton. Social determinism is the  
problem not the solution. It is the individual, thoughtful participant  
with a sense of themselves that can contribute to social consensus in  
a meaningful way. Check out the New Yorker article cited in my last  
post.
Although the interests of stakeholders need to be respected they need  
to listen and often don't. Chuck

On Sep 29, 2009, at 3:11 PM, Klaus Krippendorff wrote:

> dear chuck,
>
> are you making a 180 degree turn from your early insistence on the
> conception of intentional individuals to social network determinism?
>
> stake holder network theory goes only 90 degrees from either  
> position.  it
> recognizes human agency (non-determinist design activity) within the  
> social
> constraints on what can be communicated to and inspires the  
> stakeholders of
> design who, after all, must contribute to the realization of a design.
>
> klaus
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: PhD-Design - This list is for discussion of PhD studies and  
> related
> research in Design [mailto:PHD-DESIGN@...] On Behalf Of  
> Charles
> Burnette
> Sent: Tuesday, September 29, 2009 10:10 AM
> To: PHD-DESIGN@...
> Subject: Social networks
>
> Dear Colleagues:
>
> Those interested in the power, effects and uses of social networks  
> should be
> interested in the following:
>
> http://scienceblogs.com/cortex/?
> utm_source=bloglist&utm_medium=dropdown
>
> (You can also reach this through scienceblogs.com then choose the  
> blog The
> Frontal Cortex)
>
> The post by Jonah Lehrer was titled Social Determinism and posted  
> September
> 28, 2009.  Be sure to click on the highlighted essay to access the  
> original
> story about the Framingham Study.  Well worth it.
>
> Chuck
>

[Klaus Krippendorff]

chuck,
don't think for a minute that i am a social determinist -- although the
article you encouraged us to read claims that belief
klaus

-----Original Message-----
From: Charles Burnette [mailto:charlesburnette@...]
Sent: Tuesday, September 29, 2009 7:51 PM
To: Klaus Krippendorff
Cc: PHD-DESIGN@...
Subject: Re: Social networks

Klaus: Don't get too excited! I'm not abandoning my position at all as you
will see from my response to Kev Hilton. Social determinism is the problem
not the solution. It is the individual, thoughtful participant with a sense
of themselves that can contribute to social consensus in a meaningful way.
Check out the New Yorker article cited in my last post.
Although the interests of stakeholders need to be respected they need to
listen and often don't. Chuck

On Sep 29, 2009, at 3:11 PM, Klaus Krippendorff wrote:

> dear chuck,
>
> are you making a 180 degree turn from your early insistence on the
> conception of intentional individuals to social network determinism?
>
> stake holder network theory goes only 90 degrees from either position.  
> it recognizes human agency (non-determinist design activity) within
> the social constraints on what can be communicated to and inspires the
> stakeholders of design who, after all, must contribute to the
> realization of a design.
>
> klaus
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: PhD-Design - This list is for discussion of PhD studies and
> related research in Design [mailto:PHD-DESIGN@...] On
> Behalf Of Charles Burnette
> Sent: Tuesday, September 29, 2009 10:10 AM
> To: PHD-DESIGN@...
> Subject: Social networks
>
> Dear Colleagues:
>
> Those interested in the power, effects and uses of social networks
> should be interested in the following:
>
> http://scienceblogs.com/cortex/?
> utm_source=bloglist&utm_medium=dropdown
>
> (You can also reach this through scienceblogs.com then choose the blog
> The Frontal Cortex)
>
> The post by Jonah Lehrer was titled Social Determinism and posted
> September 28, 2009.  Be sure to click on the highlighted essay to
> access the original story about the Framingham Study.  Well worth it.
>
> Chuck
>

[Kevin Hilton-5]

Hi Chuck

I absolutely agree. I have been keen to do something since reading
Rachel Carson's Silent Spring as a kid at school. There are of course
people who have a need for change in their life, but this often seems to
relate to speed of feedback. For example the social network
acknowledging/complimenting on a new purchase, but not more complex
systems of change with delayed feedback like contributing to saving the
planet. Everyone feels so diluted in terms of personal impact it leads
to 'social loafing' in many cases, as 'the flow' takes us further down
the pan. There also seems to be an issue of the intensity of feedback
from the system/network, and people leave things till the last minutes
when the 'chasing' messages raise anxiety levels to a point that it is
less effort to complete the task/change than to continue the present
behaviour.

Designers might look at ways of improving feedback, but then in many
cases the greater 'honesty' could result in products and services
becoming economically unviable, (because they are inherently irrational)
but at the end of the day people need jobs to eat. For example the
troubles in Puerto Rico where people cannot afford to be choosy to get
work. I see such troubles ahead for many of us, to some degree, as this
unsustainable economy becomes more unstable.

Another problem with feedback is that by its very nature it has to have
happened, but what we are trying to deal with has yet to happen, but as
pointed out by Denning (2005:228) future stories/scenarios by definition
are not true, so are easy for people to discount or procrastinate about.
It comes back to the effort issue again.

So should the argument be to increase the effort required to continue on
this unsustainable path? This would suggest new policies and
regulations, but they all take time to agree. Time we don't have.

So maybe we need to develop and reinforce social embarrassment within
the networks as immediate feedback of what is unacceptable.

Regards

Kev

Denning, S. (2005) The Leader's Guide to Storytelling. Mastering the Art
and Discipline of Business Narrative. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.


Dr. Kev Hilton
Head of Research
The Centre for Design Research
School of Design
City Campus East
Northumbria University
Newcastle upon Tyne
NE1 8ST
UK

0191 243 7340
k.hilton@...
http://northumbria.ac.uk/experts/kevinhilton


-----Original Message-----
From: PhD-Design - This list is for discussion of PhD studies and
related research in Design [mailto:PHD-DESIGN@...] On Behalf
Of Charles Burnette
Sent: 29 September 2009 23:05
To: PHD-DESIGN@...
Subject: Re: Social networks

On Sep 29, 2009, at 11:10 AM, Kevin Hilton wrote:

> This is what the health and wellbeing, and the sustainability  
> promoters
> amongst us are constantly up against, in seeking to change behaviours
> and develop a more realistic and responsible culture. Oh hang it, it
> really is easier to keep going the way we are, in our social network,
> even if we do appreciate it cannot be sustainable. It doesn't seem  
> worth
> the grief, life's too demanding as it is, with information overload  
> and
> so many choices to occupy us, and keep us distracted.
>
> Some of us are however more confident and exercised to swim against or
> across the flow, watching and looking to change and to change others,
> with some successes; looking for new patterns of opportunity for  
> change
> that start off by going with the flow but become redirective. We  
> have to
> find realistic ways of 'baiting' people towards change by letting them
> 'pre-experience' the benefits, with benefits that outweigh the
> investment in effort.

Kev: The problem is that we can no longer just go with the flow: get  
more obese when our friends do, continue to waste energy because  
others do; refuse to respond to climate change because our competitors  
don't; be as greedy as our peer group, etc. (With regard to the last  
point there is another very interesting article that goes directly to  
this social determinism. It is entitled Rational Irrationality: The  
Real Reason that Capitalism is So Crash Prone by John Cassidy in the  
current (October 5, 2009) New Yorker magazine (Newyorker.com).

There is a need for the individual willful mind open to consequences  
within every social network.  We need to reward and protect the  
whistle blowers. Think Rachel Carson, or even Teddy Roosevelt when he  
put away his rifle and dreams of empire to protect nature from its  
despoilers.

One can argue strongly, I believe, that designers have the moral  
responsibility to help every group they serve to see better  
alternatives than they might collectively do.

Chuck

[Charles Burnette]

On Sep 30, 2009, at 3:14 AM, Kevin Hilton wrote:

> So should the argument be to increase the effort required to  
> continue on
> this unsustainable path? This would suggest new policies and
> regulations, but they all take time to agree. Time we don't have.
>
> So maybe we need to develop and reinforce social embarrassment within
> the networks as immediate feedback of what is unacceptable.

Kev: I think you meant to say  "increase the effort to get off this  
unsustainable path."
By all means, both as individuals and by influencing social groups.  
While social embarrassment (and local laws) have reduced the number of  
smokers, it doesn't seem to work in many other circumstances. However,  
when the message is clear enough people do change their behavior to  
act for the greater good (Seat belts, handicapped accessibility,  
etc).  Often this is due to promoting the benefits and rewards for  
doing so until a tipping point is reached. Many utilities, for example  
are now leaving the US Chamber of Commerce, because of its denial of  
climate change.  This should encourage other companies to question  
their position. Energy efficient building is now accepted by most  
clients as the way to go. etc. Good things do happen through personal  
initiatives, good leaders (Obama, etc) and changes in economic and  
social values. We just need to be vigorous in our efforts to improve  
the quality of life in whatever ways we can. Often this means going  
against the flow.

Chuck

[Kevin Hilton-5]

Hi Chuck

While a common message is that we need to make more effort to get off
this unsustainable path, what I was actually trying to suggest was using
the natural 'avoidance of effort', (taking paths of least effort), to
our advantage, by making the unsustainable path require more effort to
stay on than to get off.

Maybe it is a bad exaggerated analogy, but if for example we stopped the
manufacture of cigarettes completely, the 'die hards':) would have to
make their own.

Regards

Kev

Dr. Kev Hilton
Head of Research
The Centre for Design Research
School of Design
City Campus East
Northumbria University
Newcastle upon Tyne
NE1 8ST
UK

0191 243 7340
k.hilton@...
http://northumbria.ac.uk/experts/kevinhilton


-----Original Message-----
From: PhD-Design - This list is for discussion of PhD studies and
related research in Design [mailto:PHD-DESIGN@...] On Behalf
Of Charles Burnette
Sent: 30 September 2009 15:52
To: PHD-DESIGN@...
Subject: Re: Social networks feedback

On Sep 30, 2009, at 3:14 AM, Kevin Hilton wrote:

> So should the argument be to increase the effort required to  
> continue on
> this unsustainable path? This would suggest new policies and
> regulations, but they all take time to agree. Time we don't have.
>
> So maybe we need to develop and reinforce social embarrassment within
> the networks as immediate feedback of what is unacceptable.

Kev: I think you meant to say  "increase the effort to get off this  
unsustainable path."
By all means, both as individuals and by influencing social groups.  
While social embarrassment (and local laws) have reduced the number of  
smokers, it doesn't seem to work in many other circumstances. However,  
when the message is clear enough people do change their behavior to  
act for the greater good (Seat belts, handicapped accessibility,  
etc).  Often this is due to promoting the benefits and rewards for  
doing so until a tipping point is reached. Many utilities, for example  
are now leaving the US Chamber of Commerce, because of its denial of  
climate change.  This should encourage other companies to question  
their position. Energy efficient building is now accepted by most  
clients as the way to go. etc. Good things do happen through personal  
initiatives, good leaders (Obama, etc) and changes in economic and  
social values. We just need to be vigorous in our efforts to improve  
the quality of life in whatever ways we can. Often this means going  
against the flow.

Chuck