Types of Mobile Devices

While preparing for my research exploring sense of place and location-based services, I wanted to find out the mobile device types and usage patterns of participants.  I have previously offerred my take on the definition of mobile device and blogged on What exactly is a mobile device. I define mobile devices as having:

• ability to connect to the Internet (or other data network)
• supports user input and interaction
• offers multiple functionalities
• is lightweight and is less than 10"

In preparing for the survey, I thought I had all the major types of mobile devices listed.

Devices that are "mobile devices":

• smartphone (including "superphones", "world phones", and some feature phones)
• tablets
• netbooks and ultraportable laptop
• personal digital assistant (e.g. iPod Touch)
• GPS navigation device (a.k.a. car or personal navigation device)

Some participants used the "other" field to answer laptops and e-Readers. I also considered whether portable game consoles and digital audio guides (as some museums use) should be considered mobile devices.

Wikipedia's definition is pretty broad. To them a mobile is "small, hand-held computing device, typically having a display screen with touch input and/or a miniature keyboard and less than 2 pounds (0.91 kg)". Wikipedia lists calculators, digital cameras, and MP3 players as mobile device.  I normally love Wikipedia but I think they are stretching the term to entail pretty much any portable electronic device.

Perhaps these are all just types of handheld computing devices. I think my definition, however, fits the core functionality of what a device needs as a category term.

So although although all the devices mentioned so far have some computing power and many have network connectivity (as even many e-Readers and digital cameras now have). But an e-Reader and digital camera are pretty much single function devices.  The Kindle e-Reader does have the cool ability to of user interaction in the ability to highlight passages of eBooks and share them online with others, but users can't create substantial content and it essentially it is a single function device (hence the name even).

Laptops may be portable but they aren't portable enough to allow ubiquitous access - a trait that I think is central to the concept of mobile device (opposed to just portable device).

This is the definition I'll be using for the indefinite future in my research.  I'd love to hear any feedback on additional criteria to include. I'd also love to hear of any other devices that would fit this definition.

Research Proposals Methodology Checklist

Earlier this month, I finished work as a teaching assistants for my department's research methods class. I've TAed this for the past 2 years and I love it. There are so many (almost countless) research methods and planning a research project is probably the most fun part of the whole thing.

It's also great to read about what the masters students plan to study and the various dimensions of research possible in the field of Information. I've graded a large number of research proposals now and have been impressed by students' approaches and their research interests. However, even in the best proposals they are often missing key elements.

I put together a checklist of items to include in a research proposal for a guest lecture I did for the class. Some students found it useful, so I thought I'd share it here. Surprisingly, I haven't found a concise checklist like this in research methods texts.

I'm covering the major items that apply to common methods, such as interviews, observation, focus groups, discourse analysis, and surveys.

Sampling

• Population - describe the characteristics of the group you will be studying, mention any pertinent demographic (e.g. age, gender, location, occupation) and pyschographics (habits, attitudes, hobbies, opinions) -  if studying texts or artifacts, describe the unifying characteristics
• Sampling strategy - e.g. census, random, stratified random, or nonprobability sampling such as  convenience, purposive diversity/dissimilar, snowballing, key informant, etc.
• Sample size - number and if this number is appropriate (or the stoping point, e.g. saturation)
• Access - how you will get access to this group and permission to study them
• Recruitment techniques to be used - e.g. posters, web posts, emails, etc.
• Incentives - if using why is it necessary, how much, and how to be distributed
• Inclusion and exclusion criteria - conditions to be met to qualify or exempt people or texts from study

Method considerations

• Format - online, print, email, instant messaging - which one(s) and why
• Interview guide or questionnaire - how will questions be determined (if appropriate)
• Questioning style (e.g. structured, semi-structured, conversational for interviews) and question format (i.e. open or closed ended)
• Probing or follow-ups if used and when (e.g. during or after)
• Discussion aids - will think-aloud protocol be used, artificts (e.g. diaries, photos) or cultural probes
• Rapport - how to establish trust, confidence, and ease amongst participants

Session preparation

• Meeting location details - discuss any pertinent details such as the type of place to be held and why (e.g. convenient for participant, comfortable setting), logistics, arrangement of furniture, noise levels, position of camera, presence of others, etc.
• If communicating or observing online discuss the technology to be used and any applicable norms or constraints

Data collection

• Recording of session - audio or video taping, photodocumenting, log files
• Note-taking - during or after session?
• Third-party observers or facilitators - whether or not used, relationships to researcher, training provided, and any issues that may result
• Role of researcher - researcher biases, how will the researcher be involved in and shape data collection and any steps to mitigate or place the researcher (e.g. passive observer or participant observer)

Data analysis

• Transcription - style to be used (e.g. naturalistic, selective) and whom will do it
• Approach to data analysis (e.g. grounded theory, statistical tests, etc.)
• Software - name and describe how used
• Coding technique used and how codes determined
• Reliability measures - particularly if more than one person is coding results

Data presentation & dissemination

• Anticipated findings
• Presentation formats - e.g. case study, charts, narrative, performance, etc.
• Outcomes - e.g.recommendations, program evaluation, etc.
• Dissemination - planned conference presentations, sharing among an applicable association, publication plans, etc.
• How might the findings be shared other than a traditional paper (if applicable)?
• Sharing results with participants - e.g. send them the final paper and - will they get permission to edit?, post summary on blog,or participant community (e.g. trade association)

Ethics

• Considerations when studying a given group
• Informed consent - how it will be obtained and special situations (e.g. minors or other who may not be able to provide it)
• Deception - if used, explain why necessary
• Harm - plans to avoid any emotional or physical harm to participans, e.g. if sensitive topics raised how will this be handled, referals to specialists, etc.
• Debriefing plans (if applicable)
• Anonymity or confidentiality - steps taken in data collection,storage, and presentation to protect participants' privacy

Obviously an entire book, or several, could be written on this topic. This is meant to touch upon the major and common areas. But please let me know if I missed something crucial.

Internet Hall of Fame - Nominate First Inductees

The Internet Society, a global non-profit organization devoted to promoting open access and innovation for the Internet, is twenty years old this year.

To mark their 20 years they have started the "Internet Hall of Fame" to honour the contributions of individuals to the development of the Internet.

Despite the ubiquity of content on the Web, I have been surprised how little work there has been done documenting the history and achievements of Internet and digital media history. Granted, a few stars (including Internet Society founders Vint Cerf and Bob Kahn) are well-known for their contributions, but there are many more people who's contributions are not well-documented or significantly recognized. This led to my efforts to document Who's Who in Canadian Digital Media & Technology.

So I am excited to see the Internet Society launching the Internet Hall of Fame.

I'm also excited that Internet Society is allowing anyone to nominate someone. The final decision will be made by judges from a cross-section of related sectors.

Internet Society has published the nomination form online.

Here are their criteria for nominees:

Any individual who has played a key role in the conceptualization, building, and development of the Internet in any region/country will be considered for induction into the Internet Hall of Fame based on the influence and impact they’ve had on the Internet’s origins, growth, and evolution.

Other factors considered by the Internet Hall of Fame include the relevance and reach of a nominee’s contribution to the Internet, and the extent to which a nominee successfully took risks and challenged existing paradigms.

Further, the Internet Hall of Fame considers the originality, creativity, and innovation of a nominee’s contribution. In addition to those who have been more visible, the Internet Hall of Fame is seeking nominees who have made crucial, behind-the-scenes contributions.

The nominee’s work can include, but is not limited to, individuals who have played a key role in:

• Researching and/or building Internet infrastructure;
• Improving Internet access and/or functionality;
• Fostering growth of the Internet community; and
• Developing new Internet technologies and/or user interfaces that have had valuable and broad-reaching impacts on society.

I'm hoping to nominate someone - probably someone from my Canadian Who's Who list. But I can't decide who. Let me know below who you think should be nominated.

Nominations close February 13, 2012.

Is Facebook an Echo Chamber?

Researchers at Facebook this week published the results of an extensive research project examining the popular conception that social networking sites promulgate a singularity of information sources and voices - creating an echo chamber. With the ongoing demise of broad information sources, such as the newspaper, and the increasing usage of social media (e.g. Facbeook, Twitter, LinkedIn) and other news feeds as the primary, or only, source of news, people are not exposed to anywhere near the same diversity of issue coverage as they used to.

So the study, Rethinking Information Diversity in Networks, is an important contribution in understanding this area. It is truly impressive in its design, scale (millions of Facebook users), and dazzling graphs.  The study found that:

even though people are more likely to consume and share information that comes from close contacts that they interact with frequently (like discussing a photo from last night’s party), the vast majority of information comes from contacts that they interact with infrequently. These distant contacts are also more likely to share novel information, demonstrating that social networks can act as a powerful medium for sharing new ideas, highlighting new products and discussing current events.

Before I settled on my current research topic, I planned to research if the Internet promotes homophily and how to facilitating serendipitous information. I, as with many others, believe that access to a diversity of information sources and voices is important for an informed society and hence good government.

Facebook's study is really useful - but they are a couple claims that differ from my experience.

One, is that the nature of information on Facebook is diverse. It may be vast and it may be broad, but I found that with rare exceptions, the information circulated falls into maybe four categories. To me, I mostly see my social circle accounts, entertainment news & commentary, political news & rants, and occasionally news of the odd (okay it's me sharing those stories).

I am also not sure that those we are less close to, i.e. "weak ties", are necessarily that dissimilar and thus expose use to novel information.  I don't doubt the value of weak ties in sharing information, but I still think the information falls into common categories and still tends to roughly entail a common voice or political leaning. Weak ties are still similar to individuals or they wouldn't be a tie at all. People on social network sites certainly friend indiscriminately, even wantonly, but we don't usually friend our polar opposites.

There is no doubt that the Internet exposes us to a greater diversity of voices than older media allowed.  And the Internet definitely has improved the ability to share information - I did find out about this study through a friend's posting on Facebook. I'm still not convinced, however, that we are receiving anywhere near the diversity of coverage of issues and viewpoints that we need.

Sense of Place & Location-Based Services - Survey Summary

This past December, I designed a survey as part of my coursework for a PhD in Information at University at Toronto. As promised, I'm sharing my early results of the survey.

The survey sought to uncover foundational knowledge about how people form a sense of place (defined as the feelings and meanings attributed to place), the role of information in this process, and the potential of location-based services (LBS - defined as mobile applications or sites that deliver content based on a user's location). As location-based services are still an emerging technology, this subject has not been sufficiently addressed by academia or industry.

I'm still in the process of compiling and writing up the results, but here is a high-level summary of the findings grouped by research questions.

78 people completed the survey, with participants representing a cross-section of ages, education levels, and residences. 86% have a mobile device, with smartphones the most popular (68%) followed by GPS navigation device (31%), tablet (22%), and netbook (18%). Participants can be described as frequent users as over 80% (53 participants) indicated they used their device at least once a day.

1) What is the nature of relationships people have to places they encounter?

• 96% of participants indicating there was a place in which they associated strong feelings or meaning.
• When asked what place characteristics are meaningful, past personal experiences, physical qualities of place, and social dimensions received the strongest support with all over 75%.
• These findings confirmed phenomenologist place theorists, who believe that a relationship to place is a foundational experience in human existence and individual experience is the paramount way we process place.
• The factual elements of a place, its history and role in culture, were selected by at least half of respondents, the lack of stronger support for the these qualities was surprising as LBS can offer unique functionality to deliver this information (perhaps leading LBS have yet to effectively tap this).
• When describing a place where participants felt a "strong sense of place" in an open-ended question, 58 participants recounted experiences revealing personal experiences tied to place - a good example of this is: "Another place with a strong sense to it is an ordinary intersection... where I was told 'I love you' for the first time, in the romantic sense...the spot is still very dear!".
• Often accounts such as this reveal facets of a place hidden to others but are nonetheless significant - through LBS these types of accounts can now be made more visible.
• Descriptions of meaningful places often (67% of respondents to this question) mention emotions tied a place. Top mentioned emotions are nostalgia (fond remembrance), contentment, and excitement.

2) How are people currently using information in forming a sense of place?

• All participants agreed that access to information while at a given location is valuable.
• When asked to describe how they come to know of a specific place, experience was echoed here, with 50 participants indicating this was a primary information source.
• Personal experience was often described as an initial source of learning about a place, but was then followed by consulting various other information sources to learn more about place.
• Approximately half of respondents using two or more sources of information when learning about the place.
• When asked specifically the information sources participants use when visiting a new place for either a short (less than 1 day) or extended visit, the top five sources are (in descending order): Short visit - social network/word of mouth, website, pamphlets, mobile application, plaques. Extended visit: website, social network/word of mouth, print book, pamphlets, video or tv program.
• People are more apt to use an information source for extended visits than for short visits with the exception of mobile applications and plaques.
• In general, the more a visit demands of a person the more apt participants are to invest the time to consult a greater number of sources and more in-depth sources.

3) How, if at all, have mobile devices affected sense of place?

• The majority of participants with a mobile device are using it, in relation to place, to find location, directions or contact information.
• There is strong indication that participants are currently using mobiles to seek out facts about place beyond directions. This behaviour can be seen in the following comment: "I found out recently not to use a public car park ... after dark. The Foursquare entry had a tip that car thieves were targeting the car park".
• The ability to use mobile devices to record or share place was described by some participants as changing their experience of the place, as illustrated by this comment: "The process of inscribing your thoughts on a place while at that place is very useful in concretising your thoughts on that place. I think the practice of reflecting on the place to compose an entry requires a thinking about that place, and an ordering of thoughts about that place that gives meaning to the place (whether good or bad) and which in turn improves the memory one has of that place."
• Participants also expressed comments that they are experiencing the physical and digital worlds simultaneously, along the lines of "hybrid space" as discussed in academic litearature, this can be seen by this comment: "I pulled up a mobile app the other day when I took my children to a museum, so that I could supplement the information at the museum with information from the mobile app."
• The larger the device screen the more apt participants are to find something useful.
• The type of mobile device used does not have a strong association with usage of geotargetted information seeking via mobile device, the creation of place-based user generated content, or the likelihood to use a LBS.

4) What is the potential of location-based services to improve sense of place?

• Participants were not big users of LBS applications - of the people with a mobile device less than half have installed one of the most popular LBSs.
• The most installed used mobile applications with LBS functionality used by participants were Foursquare at 23%, Google 23%, and Facebook at 22%.
• All three of these, with the exception of Google’s Places, predominantly revolve around geo-social networking. Although place-based information can be found in the form of "tips" left by friends or made public, the core functionality of these leading apps are tracking the whereabouts of one’s social network.
• Of the participants using LBS, they expressed appreciation for the ability for the applications to enhance their sense of place by learning more about a place, as typified by these comments: "I think they have affected how much I can find out about a place and provides access to types of information about a place that I wouldn't otherwise have access to - provides richer dimensions to knowing about a place" and "Location based services have, by bringing other peoples social gazetteers into consideration, made a sense of place easier to achieve."
• LBSs were also mentioned by participants as improving their attachment to place.

5) What could be done with mobile technology to improve sense of place?

• To meet the needs of users, however, there improvements to LBS or mobile technology in general are need. Over 60% of participants offered suggestions.
• The top five suggestions were:  better content (32% support) , new functionality (26%), personalization features (21%), user experience improved (21%), and content available in more locations (17%).

Final thoughts

As one considers the possible implications for location-based services accessed via a mobile device to affect sense of place, the current iterations of technology may not reflect the qualities of future versions. The LBS market is rapidly evolving and new features and innovations as well as improvements to existing features will undoubtedly continue. Ideally, I would like my research as it continues to be able to inform future developments in this area.

Thanks to everyone who participated in this survey!

I held a random draw for an iTunes giftcard and a participant from Vancouver was chosen.

I'll revise and enhance these findings as I continue my data analysis. But I'd love to hear any thoughts below on these early results.

Locative Media & Media Used to Convey Place Information

As much research continues into how we use location based services on mobile devices to access geotargetted information, I've been considering other ways we can access information about place. There is a lot of buzz over the past couple years about locative media - with a frequent assumption that it is new technology. Humans have had ways to leave information about a place at the place for millennia. I'm not convinced that new technology has created an entirely new experience, but rather has facilitate access to this information.

I've found it helpful for my research to maintain a list of various forms of media used to convey place-related information.

The table below lists each medium, its corresponding modalities, the presence of user participation functionality, and the physical portability of the medium.

Medium	Modalities	User participation	Portability
Audio tours	Sound	No	Mobile
Billboards	Visual	No	Situated
Books and e-books	Visual	No	Mobile
Directories	Visual	No	Situated (if in phone booth), mobile otherwise
Films and videos	Visual, sound	Yes (if creating)	Situated - if viewing on tv or cinema Mobile - if viewing on mobile device
Flags	Visual	No	Situated
GPS devices (for cars or hiking)	Visual, haptic	Yes	Mobile
Graffiti	Visual	Yes	Situated
Guestbooks (physical)	Visual	Yes	Situated
Guides (human)	Visual, sound	Yes	Mobile
Help desks/info booths	Visual, sound	Yes	Situated
Interactive kiosks	Visual, sound, haptic	Yes	Situated
Maps, atlases, and charts	Visual	No	Mobile
Media facades and electronic billboards	Visual, sound	No	Situated
Mobile applications	Visual, sound, haptic	Yes	Mobile
Newspapers	Visual	No	Mobile
Pamphlets	Visual	No	Mobile
Photographs	Visual	Yes (if creating)	Mobile
Plaques	Visual	No	Situated
Posters	Visual	No	Situated
Sandwich boards	Visual, sound	Yes	Situated (somewhat mobile)
Sculptures	Visual	No	Situated
Signage (print & electronic)	Visual	No	Situated
Television shows	Visual, sound	No	Situated
Website	Visual, sound	Yes	Situated (unless viewing on mobile device)
Word of mouth	Visual, sound	Yes	Mobile

Let me know if I missed a medium or if there's another key dimension I should add to this table.