Free2Thee.com

Archive for the ‘Psychology & Social Sciences’ Category

Today’s culture is obsessed with data. We love approval ratings of presidents, how the public feels about prescription drugs, and the ratings of our favorite TV shows. So it’s no wonder that infographics have been all the rage online. If you’re not familiar with infographics, here’s the scoop: they are a way to visualize and absorb data quickly through graphics. But just like anything, there’s good and there’s bad infographics. Bad infographics don’t go viral. Great ones do. Here are some tips for creating and designing brilliant, wonderful, great infographics. Great infographics tell a story The whole point of an infographic is to stray away from boring data. How do you do that? By telling a story. Anyone can slap some charts and graphs on a canvas and call it an infographic, but great infographics establish an emotional connection through stories. Stories can make anything interesting. Even the boring topics. Take a look at this interview with Chairman and CEO of Mandalay Bay, Peter Guber, about how to use purposeful storytelling to engage audiences: Take a look at this bad infographic: By: The Economist Not only is it ugly and its data is misleading, but it tells no story. I may now know some percentage changes in violent crime rates, but I can guarantee I’m not passing it on. It didn’t connect with me. Now take a look at this one: By: Veracode It’s a battle! A clash of the titans on one of the internet’s most important subjects today: privacy and security. It makes me ask, “Who am I rooting for?” See the difference? By creating a narrative you can engage audiences, draw them in, and make them want to pass around your infographic. Great infographics are specific Imagine trying to sum up the Royal Wedding. Where would you begin? There just are far too many elements to include. But the social impact of the royal wedding online, now there’s a concept. By: iStrategyConference.com Great infographics use short text Shakespeare once wrote, “..brevity is the soul of wit.” There is far too little time in this world for it to be wasted. Make it brief and make it concise. If you don’t, you’ll lose us in your monstrous paragraphs. And didn’t we click on this infographic link because we thought we’d get it quick and dirty? This is not quick and dirty: By: MisconceptionJunction.com This is: By: ADT Great infographic titles say it all Now this infographic isn’t bad, but it’s unclear. The title “The Mobile Advantage” tells us nothing. Does that mean people with mobile phones have more friends? Do mobile phones make us more money? Do they make us sexier? I have no idea because the title doesn’t tell me. By: Nuance Now take a look at this infographic: By: Jobvine The title says it all. “What Does It Take to Get a Job at Google?” I know exactly what this infographic is about. It’s going to tell me everything I need to do in order to get hired by Google. Clear and informative. Much better than a title like “Google Jobs.” Great infographics use credible sources One source from Wikipedia isn’t going to cover it. Credibility is everything. Strictly from an ethical standpoint, you don’t want to mislead people with the wrong data. Plus they’ll find out — which they always do — and you’ll be torn to pieces. If you can’t find the data you need or collect it accurately, don’t do it. Find a new concept. Simple as that. Here are a few sources for finding reliable data: Census.gov – This is the data collected by the United States Census Bureau. Data.gov – Data collected by the United States government. Data.UN.org – Data collected by the UN.

Go here to see the original:
What Makes Great Infographics Great

In spite of the doomsday warnings of those who bemoan the disappearance of a generation into the gaping maw of the Internet, a new study has shown that Internet usage does not replace traditional media in the lives of young people. Researchers from the University of Gothenburg in Sweden studied Swedish young people between the ages of nine and 24. They discovered that this group almost universally used the Internet. However, the investigators found no evidence that the study participants abandoned traditional media for the sake of the Internet. According to lead author Professor Olle Findahl, study participants did spend less time than their predecessors watching television, listening to recorded or broadcast music and reading traditional print publications. They still spent more time engaged in these pastimes than they spent on the Internet, though. In the 1950s, the advent of television had naysayers predicting the end of radio and print. What actually happened was that people added television to the list of ways in which they accessed information. A similar trend appears to be occurring today with the Internet. The areas in which the Internet seems to actually supplant traditional media rather than complement it include the delivery of both films and music. However, many uses of the Internet have no counterpart in traditional media. For example, social networks allow people to develop contacts with like-minded people who share their interests. Until recently, long-distance communication between people who shared beliefs, hobbies or passions was usually only possible between two individuals at a time. Even then, usually the two individuals had originally encountered each other in person either socially or during the course of business. The researchers found that more young people are reached by Facebook than by newspapers, and Facebook reaches nearly as many of them as television does. Spotify, a digital music delivery service, reaches almost as many young people as broadcast radio does. Simply being available through the Internet is no guarantee that a service will appeal to today’s youth, however. Tablets, eBooks and Twitter are popular mostly with older users and have little appeal to young people. On the other hand, smartphone use among children and young adults has rapidly expanded in recent years. Previous studies have shown that when people begin using the Internet there is no corresponding drop in their use of traditional media. In fact, research has consistently shown that those who use the Internet most heavily are also heavy users of older types of media.

View original post here:
Internet Usage Does Not Replace Traditional Media [Study]

Cool, I just added you on Facebook . If you, like Jeopardy contestant Ken Jennings, are ready to welcome “our new computer overlords,” chances are you won’t have to wait long. Progress in the field of artificial intelligence has advanced by leaps and bounds over the past few years, churning out incredible machines like IBM’s Watson, which soundly defeated Jennings and fellow player Brad Rutter at America’s toughest trivia game. Now, scientists at Georgia Tech’s Center for Robotics and Intelligent Machines (RIM) say they are within a decade of creating personal robots capable of cleaning our homes, taking us on guided tours and caring for our grandparents in nursing facilities. However, computer scientists simply won’t be able to program every robot to do all the things we will want them to do. This means we’ll have to tell robots what do to and how to do it. How will we do that? Tip 1: Use English Scientists want our interaction with robots to be as intuitive as possible, so that means designing them to process our natural language. Usually, computers are programmed using math-based languages, but most people don’t want to earn a degree in computer science just to tell a machine to vacuum the floor. With this in mind, scientists are developing programming languages based on English syntax rather than mathematical symbols, which is no small feat. Math-based languages allow for only one means of expression, while natural languages like English can phrase a single thought in half a dozen ways. When programming in a natural language, scientists must factor in all, or most, possible phrasings of input commands—a tedious task, but one that won’t leave future citizens guessing for the exact phrasing that will get robots to take out the trash. Tip 2: Throw Away that Keyboard Though almost anyone can type a command into a computer, that kind of input method will prove impractical when granny needs her robot to help her out of the bathtub. Scientists know that personal robots will be expected to operate on voice commands for ease and efficiency of use. Some of this technology is already available through mediums like the iPhone’s Siri software, which allows users to make phone calls, send texts and search the Internet by voice. However, tomorrow’s robots will need to do more than just process simple voice commands; they will also need to learn the tasks their owners want them to do. This will require them to have electronic brains capable of being programmed with both visual and auditory information in the human-like process of “active learning.” RIM’s Maya Cakmak, Ph.D., is bringing this advanced technology to life by programming a robot named Simon to learn new tasks by asking questions. Her study on the subject, entitled “Designing Robot Learners that Ask Good Questions,” was recently presented at the 7th ACM/IEEE Conference on Human-Robot Interaction (HRI). Cakmak’s work will someday allow ordinary people to program robots without ever touching a keypad or phrasing commands in seemingly bizarre ways. However, you may still have to demonstrate for your robot exactly how to line up your collectible action figures. Tip 3: Teach It to Ask the Right Questions Robots can’t ask just any kind of question if they are to learn and communicate effectively with their human masters. People don’t want to spend all day teaching their robots how to hang up a jacket, for instance. So, what kinds of questions should a robot ask to facilitate a smooth robot-human interaction? Surprisingly, humans have provided the answer. In an experiment, Cakmak asked a group of people to pretend to be robots bent on learning a new task. The questions participants asked in the course of their learning were sorted into three categories: label query, demonstration query and feature query. Cakmak found that 82 percent of the questions fell into the feature query category. When Cakmak asked the group to then rate which questions were “smartest,” 72 percent chose feature queries. Since humans seem to overwhelmingly prefer feature queries, this is the type of question learning robots will ask in the future. A feature query seeks to define the features a particular task. The example given in Cakmak’s study was, “Can I pour salt from any height?” Technically, anyone can pour salt from almost any height, but it may not be appropriate or desirable to do so, especially when the flavor of your mashed potatoes is at stake. This differs widely from a label query (“Can I pour salt like this?”), which simply yields a ‘yes’ or ‘no’ response. Tip 4: Observe the Subtle Cues There’s more to communication than just verbalizing. Eye contact, hand gestures, tone of voice and body language are all part of the equation, and things that robots will have to master to truly integrate into our world. “Other human beings understand turn-taking,” says Aaron Bobick, chair of Georgia Tech’s School of Interactive Computing. “They understand that if I make some indication, they’ll turn and face someone when they want to engage with them, and they won’t when they don’t want to engage with them. In order for these robots to work with us effectively, they have to obey these same kinds of social conventions.” In the future, robots will be able to wave, beckon and communicate in other non-verbal ways. They’ll also be able to analyze their masters’ social and physical communication cues and respond to them appropriately. Researchers at Georgia Tech found that when they equipped their robot Simon with cameras, it could predict with 80 percent accuracy whether or not it had attracted a person’s attention with a simple mechanical gesture. Talking to a socially conscious robot means you won’t feel the urge to scream to make your wishes understood. Tip 5: Remember, It is Still a Robot Scientists are working hard to give robots more human-like qualities, such as smooth movements and somewhat random behavior. The purpose in doing these things is to make human-robot communication as natural and productive as possible. Someday, people may even be able to learn tasks by observing how robots perform them. No matter how human they seem, though, they’re still machines incapable of acting beyond their programming. This is especially important to remember if you ever find yourself in a hospital about to get a sponge bath from Georgia Tech’s “Cody.” No, the robot isn’t touching your arm to comfort you. It doesn’t have that capacity. You can climb down from the ceiling, now.

Go here to read the rest:
5 Tips for Communicating with a Robot

A single photograph can communicate as much information as an entire volume of written text. Similarly, a single gesture can often communicate as much as an entire conversation. Furthermore, gestures tend to leave lasting impressions. Your mother’s last wave as the kindergarten bus pulled away on your first day of school, the thumbs up sign your father gave you from the back of the auditorium on graduation day or the upwardly thrust middle finger as your ex-partner peeled out of your driveway for the last time will remain with you forever. Chances are, all the different feelings you experienced when you saw those gestures will stick with you for just as long. As powerful as gestures are, however, their meanings are not always universal. Gestures often remain the same across cultures but carry dramatically different meanings and connotations. Your father’s thumbs up graduation day sign would have had a very different effect on your mood if you both had been natives of Greece. Use the following infographic from Pimsleur Approach to learn more about common American hand gestures and their meanings in different parts of the world. Related posts: Politicians’ Hand Gestures Reveal Their Good and Bad Thoughts Signers Identify Non-Verbal Cues More Quickly, Study Reveals The Role of Nonverbal Communication in Virtual Environments and Real Life Scenarios [Study]

See the article here:
Don’t Export Your American Hand Gestures [Infographic]

In this video, Kate Hartman talks about the wearable art that she has created. Hartman, who calls herself an artist, educator and technologist, in that order, is a physical computing instructor. She shares with her audience her observations and personal sense of wonder about the ways in which humans communicate with themselves, with others and with the world around them in the context of modern technological advances. Hartman begins her presentation by introducing herself and telling watchers about her credentials and her own work, then challenges her audience to think about why bodies matter. The answer, she tells them, is that everyone has one. Everyone uses their bodies to hear and to make themselves heard. As part of her exploration of the ways in which people use technology to facilitate or block the development of relationships with self, others and the surrounding environment, Hartman has developed a number of technological devices that can be worn. Hartman’s whimsical communication projects include a Hat to Share Your Thoughts that allows wearers to share the cacophony of thoughts that fill the human consciousness, a Talk to Yourself Hat that channels the wearer’s voice back into his or her own ears, a Gut Listener to allow a person to listen to their own insides and the Discommunicator, that allows the intensity of angry words to get through but muffles the individual words that are spoken. For Hartman, what matters is not so much the devices themselves and whether they accomplish their aims, but what occurs inside the person who wears them and how that experience changes the wearer. The message Hartman hopes to leave with those she touches through her art and her science is that although humans find themselves in a very exciting time when devices allow people to communicate more quickly and in more ways than anyone ever predicted, it is crucial that people “…maintain a sense of wonder and a sense of criticality about the tools we use and the way we relate to the world.” No related posts.

See the original post:
The Art of Wearable Communication [Video]

People with low self-esteem post more negative updates, which makes them less likeable. On the surface, Facebook would seem to offer important benefits to people who have low self-esteem. Sharing is easy and feels safe on Facebook, and sharing is an important way to improve friendships. Having a stable network of social connections helps to improve self-esteem. In reality, though, it may not work out that way. A new study conducted by Amanda Forest and Joanne Wood of the University of Waterloo found that people with low self-esteem tend to post too many negative updates, causing friends to see them as less likeable. The study will be published in the journal Psychological Science . Initially, the researchers, who have a special focus on self-esteem and how it impacts which emotions people express, thought that Facebook would be an ideal venue for people to go to learn social skills and improve friendships. People who have lower self-esteem typically find it hard to share their feelings in a one-on-one setting. However, Facebook allows users to share and have social interactions without the need for face-to-face contact. The researchers found that participants with low self-esteem often view Facebook as a chance to connect and interact with others in a safe setting without the awkwardness they often feel in live, in-person social settings. Participants were also asked to provide the ten most recent updates about their life that they posted for their Facebook friends to see. The updates were rated for negativity, then an undergraduate research assistant went through the updates and indicated how likeable they found the person who made the statements from the updates. Participants who had low self-esteem tended to post updates that were more negative on average. In turn, the assistants who rated their updates tended to find them less likeable than people with higher self-esteem. Although the raters did not know the people who posted the updates, according to Forest, a previous study showed that almost half of the friends people list on Facebook are strangers or mere acquaintances, rather than close friends. The study found that when participants with low self-esteem placed very positive messages on their pages, they received more responses from members of their actual Facebook friends list than they did when they placed negative or neutral messages on Facebook. However, participants who had high self-esteem got more responses from their friends when they posted negative messages. Forest and Wood speculate that this may be because, in both cases, these types of posts are more unusual for these users. The investigators concluded that, while people who have low self-esteem may be more willing to share on Facebook, they might not receive the same benefits from doing so that they would get from face-to-face encounters. This is because people may not be as willing to provide feedback on Facebook the way they might in person. According to Forest, in a live social setting, people may be able to pick up on a friend’s negative reaction to to something they said. “On Facebook, you don’t see most of the reactions.” Related posts: Facebook positively influences education, study says Facebook’s Effect on Interpersonal Relationships [Infographic] Almost Half of Facebook Users Have Profanity on Their Wall

Go here to see the original:
Don’t Use Facebook If You Have Low Self-Esteem [Study]