when the first time I come in social networking class ,I consider that social networking is talking about how people will behavior on social network site only. I regard social network as a platform for individuals to announce a variety of point of view and vice versa get other people's view about the topics which interesting them. and my first blog reflects my original cognition of social network.
I realize that social networking is far more interesting and diversified both in social psychology part and technical area after almost a whole term. However,I'd like to talk about what's new I have learned of both these two parts.
The most significant knowledge I get from the social psychology part is that environment has great impact on individuals according to SCT(social cognitive theory) so that we should make great efforts to putting ourselves locate in better groups. However,lots of people knows the theory and they continually try to do this. E.g,students always struggle to let themselves enrolled in top universities such as CUHK while employees always try to jump into better enterprises even though small companies sometimes provide more competitive treatments.
However,in my humble opinion,these people only realize part of SCT but ignore the other part which is also important: individuals in the group will also affect the environment which means that sometimes may be it's a better choice to netting your world better rather than netting a new world. For example,sometimes the opportunity for people make themselves enrolled in the top enterprises such as Google or Microsoft. Actually,this kind of fact always disappointing you. However,it doesn't obstruct you to make work harder in your current group and make enviable achievements. What's more,your hard-working will encourage other members in the group and ultimately make your group to be a better one.
This course makes me have more cognition on social networking not only in the social psychology side. When we talk about technical part ,semantic web is the part which most amazing me.
We all have the concept that IOT(Internet of things) may be a new revolution in information engineering filed which I consider that it's true. What's more,as far as I can see,semantic web will be such an important part of IOT that everyone should have the basic concept and awareness on it. Computers will no longer 'computers' but also true 'processors' within the help of semantic web technology. I think that semantic web will be widely used in searching area at first. Rather than putting into some simple key-words in the search bar and get several links from the social network like today,I consider that the searching procedure will be far more interesting in the future.For example,sometimes we cannot describe one thing both precisely and briefly by using characters but it maybe easier to be done by using figures.Perhaps we can put several pictures into search bar which we think can represent for things we want to search for instead of some key-words,and after then the social network site could understand the meaning of these pictures by using some multimedia processing algorithms and accurately put the answers back to clients.
However,I think that the development of semantic web is not only things about technology but also need perfect knowledge of various fields. Netting a strong enough world is obviously very important to push forward the development of semantic web. After all,individual's energy and talent is finite and no one can be an expert in every area.All in all,information is the most valuable resource at the present times.
2013年11月22日星期五
2013年11月3日星期日
Man in the Mirror(Assignment 3 of IEMS5720)
Social psychology part makes me most interested with no doubt.
As what we know from the lecture of this course,social psychology is the part of psychology that studies human interaction and is about understanding individual behavior in a social context.
It is obvious that individual behavior covers self-presentation in our common sense. However,self-presentation in some degree decided by self-knowledge.
Self-knowledge and self-presentation,here comes the two topics which I what to talk about.
Why the impression which we format beyond other people sometimes quite different from our self-cognition? Why what we look like in others' eyes become extremely different compared with our self-knowledge? And which one is our true self?
These question are interesting. In my opinion, our self-knowledge,in most time,is not enough to help us to evaluate ourselves precisely. However,our impression which we format beyond others is not enough as well. It is the combination of these two images makes a true 'self'.
Some researchers have showed a conclusion that when we evaluate ourselves, we intend to consider 'what we can do' ,which means that we preferred to focus on our potential when we generate self-knowledge. However,it becomes quite different when others estimate us. People intend to estimate others by what they 'have done',which means people will focus on your current capability when they are evaluating you.
Not only the current capability but also the potential of a people which should be taken into consider and vice-versa. It is the reason that I think we should combine the two images,ourselves and the man in the mirror, when we want to know what is our true self. This theory also help us how to know what we look like in others' perception,for example,when we are in an interview.
Another topic that I want to talk about is self-presentation. In the lecture,we have known that Social psychologist identified 5 different strategic motives in the way we attempt to present ourselves which are:
Self-promotion,Ingratiation,Intimidation,Exemplification and Supplication.
However,what makes me interested is that why are these five different strategic motives happen? Which kind of individuals correspond to which kind of motive? Is there a general answer behind the appearance?
To answer these questions , I focus on my friends' 'signature' or what we call 'status' on some social networks such as 'renren' or 'qq' and try to find an answer. As far as what I consider,I found that ,from some perspective,people are inclined to make up a man in the mirror when they express themselves through social network.
'A man in the mirror',I use this description again. I think everyone can understand it when I used it first time,but I consider that it is necessary for me to make some explain when I use this description again.
According to a research conclusion, when we look into the mirror,we will generate brain illusion. Everyone wants to be more beautiful and it is obvious that everyone knows their shortcoming of their appearance.For example,a girl may be think her eyes are too small while the other boy think he is not strong enough. Consequently,our brain will generate illusion when we look into mirror to make the image looks better.What's more , it is just the shortcoming which we care about will be modified at first which means the girl think her eyes are too small will see herself with bigger eyes and the boy think he is not strong enough will see a stringer man when they are looking into mirror.
This interesting phenomenon is quite similar as what people intend to express themselves on the social network. For example,I found that it is always the people who are not confident enough want to make self-promotion,which can persuade others they are competent and people who actually think themselves are not strong enough tend to make intimidation so that they think they can protect themselves. It is just like we want to see 'a man in the mirror ',which represent the man we want to be and we appreciate.
As what we know from the lecture of this course,social psychology is the part of psychology that studies human interaction and is about understanding individual behavior in a social context.
It is obvious that individual behavior covers self-presentation in our common sense. However,self-presentation in some degree decided by self-knowledge.
Self-knowledge and self-presentation,here comes the two topics which I what to talk about.
Why the impression which we format beyond other people sometimes quite different from our self-cognition? Why what we look like in others' eyes become extremely different compared with our self-knowledge? And which one is our true self?
These question are interesting. In my opinion, our self-knowledge,in most time,is not enough to help us to evaluate ourselves precisely. However,our impression which we format beyond others is not enough as well. It is the combination of these two images makes a true 'self'.
Some researchers have showed a conclusion that when we evaluate ourselves, we intend to consider 'what we can do' ,which means that we preferred to focus on our potential when we generate self-knowledge. However,it becomes quite different when others estimate us. People intend to estimate others by what they 'have done',which means people will focus on your current capability when they are evaluating you.
Not only the current capability but also the potential of a people which should be taken into consider and vice-versa. It is the reason that I think we should combine the two images,ourselves and the man in the mirror, when we want to know what is our true self. This theory also help us how to know what we look like in others' perception,for example,when we are in an interview.
Another topic that I want to talk about is self-presentation. In the lecture,we have known that Social psychologist identified 5 different strategic motives in the way we attempt to present ourselves which are:
Self-promotion,Ingratiation,Intimidation,Exemplification and Supplication.
However,what makes me interested is that why are these five different strategic motives happen? Which kind of individuals correspond to which kind of motive? Is there a general answer behind the appearance?
To answer these questions , I focus on my friends' 'signature' or what we call 'status' on some social networks such as 'renren' or 'qq' and try to find an answer. As far as what I consider,I found that ,from some perspective,people are inclined to make up a man in the mirror when they express themselves through social network.
'A man in the mirror',I use this description again. I think everyone can understand it when I used it first time,but I consider that it is necessary for me to make some explain when I use this description again.
According to a research conclusion, when we look into the mirror,we will generate brain illusion. Everyone wants to be more beautiful and it is obvious that everyone knows their shortcoming of their appearance.For example,a girl may be think her eyes are too small while the other boy think he is not strong enough. Consequently,our brain will generate illusion when we look into mirror to make the image looks better.What's more , it is just the shortcoming which we care about will be modified at first which means the girl think her eyes are too small will see herself with bigger eyes and the boy think he is not strong enough will see a stringer man when they are looking into mirror.
This interesting phenomenon is quite similar as what people intend to express themselves on the social network. For example,I found that it is always the people who are not confident enough want to make self-promotion,which can persuade others they are competent and people who actually think themselves are not strong enough tend to make intimidation so that they think they can protect themselves. It is just like we want to see 'a man in the mirror ',which represent the man we want to be and we appreciate.
2013年10月11日星期五
Continent Always Beats Islet (Assignment 2 of IEMS5720 )
Let's come straight to the point and share my own experience of last class activity.
Our task is to answer the following two questions and our original material is a paper which just includes a brief introduction of Semantic Web.
- 1. What is the definition of Semantic Web?
– 2. What are the possible applications of Semantic Web in Online
Social Networks?
Unfortunately,I have to admit that I have no idea of Semantic Web before this class activity so that my original level is 'ignorant'. Base on this condition,my epistemic aim in the individual activity is 'Minimally justified belief' and 'Knowledge' which means that I want to know is that what the author tends to show. And what's more,I try to justify both what I believe and what the author says is true.
When it comes to activity two,I have already have a brief concept of Semantic Web so that my epistemic aim changes to be 'understanding' and 'Knowledge construction / co-construction' because that I have achieve the lower level epistmic aim and it is naturally that people want to pursue higher level epismic aim in such situation. What's more, various congnition from other group members makes it's more possible to 'Grasp of explanatory connections and relations of a series of propositions ',which is the basic method and definition of 'Understanding'.
It is obvious that there exists many differences between individual and group epistemic congnition. Let's discuss such differences in term of five components in epistemic congnition.
Firstly,differences in 'epistemic aims' as well as 'structure of knowledge' has been shown above. Group members provide congnition in various perspectives which makes it is easier to pursue high level epistemic aim or build abundant structure of knowledge.
In term of 'Certainty, sources, and justification of knowledge' and 'Reliably and processes'components,group congnition also behaves better than individual congnition. Take my class activity experience as an example. During the individual congnition period,I can only justify whether th,e author intends to tell us is true by some certain methods which I am used to do. Forer example,searching on the Internet and make a contrast between different sources.
However,group congnition allows group members communicate with each other so that we can easily find our different opinions and searching for papers of related topics directly. It is obvious more efficient than individual work.What's more,when different group members search for related topics respectively,we will have a better chance to find different resources which can be used to synthesized and then produce a more comprehensive idea.
When I approach to a new problem individually,I prefer to grab key-words in reading materials to give a brief description of the problem at first and then search for papers of related area on Internet.So in my individual docx file,you can see some highlights of original definitions or key-words which are related to the two questions. However,in the group congnition period,I would like to read other members' opinions at first and try to find the differences so that in our group doxc file you can find that I comment on different opinions at first. After this first step,I would like to judge if such different opinions can combined together which means the differences generated because of different pespectives.
If so,combine it to achieve more comprehensive conginition of this topic and if not,which means that one of us should be wrong. It is obvious that we need to communicate with each other in this situation and search for evidence of our opinions respectively until both of us receive more precise congnition.
Our task is to answer the following two questions and our original material is a paper which just includes a brief introduction of Semantic Web.
- 1. What is the definition of Semantic Web?
– 2. What are the possible applications of Semantic Web in Online
Social Networks?
Unfortunately,I have to admit that I have no idea of Semantic Web before this class activity so that my original level is 'ignorant'. Base on this condition,my epistemic aim in the individual activity is 'Minimally justified belief' and 'Knowledge' which means that I want to know is that what the author tends to show. And what's more,I try to justify both what I believe and what the author says is true.
When it comes to activity two,I have already have a brief concept of Semantic Web so that my epistemic aim changes to be 'understanding' and 'Knowledge construction / co-construction' because that I have achieve the lower level epistmic aim and it is naturally that people want to pursue higher level epismic aim in such situation. What's more, various congnition from other group members makes it's more possible to 'Grasp of explanatory connections and relations of a series of propositions ',which is the basic method and definition of 'Understanding'.
It is obvious that there exists many differences between individual and group epistemic congnition. Let's discuss such differences in term of five components in epistemic congnition.
Firstly,differences in 'epistemic aims' as well as 'structure of knowledge' has been shown above. Group members provide congnition in various perspectives which makes it is easier to pursue high level epistemic aim or build abundant structure of knowledge.
In term of 'Certainty, sources, and justification of knowledge' and 'Reliably and processes'components,group congnition also behaves better than individual congnition. Take my class activity experience as an example. During the individual congnition period,I can only justify whether th,e author intends to tell us is true by some certain methods which I am used to do. Forer example,searching on the Internet and make a contrast between different sources.
However,group congnition allows group members communicate with each other so that we can easily find our different opinions and searching for papers of related topics directly. It is obvious more efficient than individual work.What's more,when different group members search for related topics respectively,we will have a better chance to find different resources which can be used to synthesized and then produce a more comprehensive idea.
When I approach to a new problem individually,I prefer to grab key-words in reading materials to give a brief description of the problem at first and then search for papers of related area on Internet.So in my individual docx file,you can see some highlights of original definitions or key-words which are related to the two questions. However,in the group congnition period,I would like to read other members' opinions at first and try to find the differences so that in our group doxc file you can find that I comment on different opinions at first. After this first step,I would like to judge if such different opinions can combined together which means the differences generated because of different pespectives.
If so,combine it to achieve more comprehensive conginition of this topic and if not,which means that one of us should be wrong. It is obvious that we need to communicate with each other in this situation and search for evidence of our opinions respectively until both of us receive more precise congnition.
2013年9月19日星期四
Make Your Speech& Meet by Chance (Assignment 1 of IEMS 5720)
I may complete this post in a relatively pleasant way since we have been told that 'Don't write like a professor' during lecture 2. And fortunately, it's such a pity that I am not a professor till now so that I won't worry about that.
As mentioned, I am a new student but not a professor in this field so that I don't intend to talk about definitions and concepts which we have known from lectures. It seems to have slight significance to repeat them because all of us can get better answers through Google or lecture notes. What I want to share is my own cognition of this topic : what is social networking ?
I regard social networking as an input and output procedure among a specific but sometimes random society.
From the 'output' side, I consider that social network is a platform on which people could make their speech conveniently and social networking is procedure of using social network to share. What I mean by 'make a speech' is that we can always use social network to make our output more influential than traditional ways. For example, when you share something with one of your friends by a letter, you can only make one person known what you what to express. However, if you post your opinion on a website, you can attract more individuals to communicate with you and this is just like you have made a speech . Nowadays, people are always busy enough to have little chance to communicate with others so that perhaps we need shall our experience or express our opinions in a prompt way. Social network sites such as Facebook provides such platform to their users. What the 'Facebook s' provide us are not just servers which can afford online storage space but also a willing to share. Therefore, I think social networking is also a willing to share ,whatever knowledge,opinions,life experiences or something else.
From the 'input' side, I consider that social networking originate in such a willing that people want to meet by chance through the social network. Not only meet other individuals ,but also whatever they want to meet such as the key of their specific problems. What I mean 'by chance' is that ,through social network, we always find something out of our exception and sometimes unfortunately ,can't find our target objects . You can't find the answer every time when you are searching on Google but sometimes you get the answers when you just want to browse one of your friend's homepage on the Facebook because of his sharing or blog!
What's more, I want to explain that why I consider that a society which is constructed through a social network is specific but sometimes random. We usually communicate with our friends or at least people that we have known in the real world even when we use a social network, that's why I consider the society is 'specific'. However, sometimes when we write a post, our friends share it and then friends'friends that we may not know can see our post as well,that's why I consider the society is sometimes'random'. Such property of 'random',in my humble opinion, occasionally have negative impact from the security perspective.
I want to know most about social networking is that how to analyse individuals' behavior on the social network both in psychology and mathematics perspectives and how to demonstrate the validity of our analysis .Furthermore, how can we use kinds of theories and analysis methods to help some of the existing online social websites to be more attractive and helpful in turn is also interesting .
订阅：
博文 (Atom)