NCSU MGD thesis proposal

1. 11.08.10 Thesis Proposal
Laura Janet Rodriguez
Researchable Question
How could a cognitive artifact1
for reflective cognition 2
be integrated into the profile management
process 3
of 18-24 4
year old participants of social networking sites?
Sub Questions
How could a cognitive artifact...
...encourage a synergistic relationship 5
with participants?
...reveal a participant’s pattern of online behavior that puts them at risk?
...communicate the permanence of online information?
...expose the susceptibility of the future self?
Areas of Investigation
1
Cognitive Artifact: According to Donald Norman, an expert of cognitive science, cognitive artifacts are “those artificial devices that maintain,
display, or operate upon information in order to serve a representational function and that affect human cognitive performance.”
2
Reflective Cognition: According to Donald Norman, “the reflective mode is that of comparison and contrast, of thought, of decision making.”
3
Profile Management Process: The input of information within the boundaries of one’s personal profile page—via text or photo—that can be viewed
by approved outsiders.
4
18-24: There is empirical evidence that the 15-24 year old age group have similar perspectives on online privacy and similar online behaviors within
the realm of social networking. I narrowed down the age group further to 18-24 in an effort to exploit the affordances of participants that are not
under parental supervision.
5
Synergistic Relationship: The interaction of two or more agents or forces so that their combined effect is greater than the sum of their individual effects.
social networking
18-24 year olds
participants
cognitive artifact
cognitive artifact
reflective cogntion
synergistic relationship online
patterns
permanence
of online info
susceptibility
of future self

2. 11.08.10 Thesis Assumptions, Justification, & Limitations
Laura Janet Rodriguez
Assumptions
While there are many different kinds of social networking services, this thesis will focus on personal networks,
like Facebook, Friendster and MySpace. These social networking services are designed to give viewers a sense of the
participant’s true self, making their virtual identities similar to who they are in the real world. Most of the people in these
networks are not hiding behind facades, since socially connecting with existing friendships is the main objective. Paul
DiMaggio, et al writes in “Social Implications Of The Internet”, that “Online communities come in very different shapes
and sizes, ranging from virtual communities that connect geographically distant people with no prior acquaintance who
share similar interests, to settings that facilitate interactions among friendship networks or family members, to community
networks that focus on issues relevant to a geographically defined neighborhood. Research on “online community” should
distinguish among these forms, lest results appear contradictory and confusing“ (DiMaggio).
Personal networks allow participants to create detailed online profiles and connect with other participants, with an
emphasis on social relationships. They often involve the sharing of information with other approved participants, such as
gender, age, interests, educational background and employment. These platforms may also share selected information with
individuals and applications that are not authorized contacts (Fact Sheet 35).
Justification
The legalities on information privacy are currently fuzzy, so it is difficult to determine where the government is
allowed to intervene. Our new ‘age of information’ is proliferating the exchange of private data without concise regulations
on how collected information can be used. Participants of personal networks need to be cautious whenever inputting
information, but caution and safety seem to dissipate within the framework of personal networks due to skewed perceptions
on what is safe and trustworthy. Many participants of online social networks do not know the terms of use of the interface
they interact and contribute to on a daily basis and they have no idea what role third party applications play or who truly has
access to their information.
The use of social networking sites is growing in popularity, and participants are not always aware of the lack of
privacy in even a semi-public online environment. Although the 18-24 year old group only makes up 9% of social networking
participants in the United States (Google Ad Planner: United States demographics data), they are proven to consistently
post more information at a higher percentage than any other age group (Williams, Kaven, 2009). The amount of information
participants post in their profiles could present risks to their privacy and safety; including identity theft, phishing scams,
cyber harassment, cyber stalking, and cyber bullying. There should also be concern over the 18-24 age group because they
soon will be entering the workforce with habits formed from long term risky behaviors online that could impact the security
policy of their future workplace.
Limitations
Although there are many touchpoints where information privacy is at risk within the realm of online social
networking, this study will focus solely on the profile management process where participants are confronted with specific
motivations and prompts for sharing information. Although people aged 35-44 are the majority of social networking
participants (Google Ad Planner: United States demographics data), older users are more concerned with information
privacy than younger internet users ( I. Brown T. Zukowski, 2007). The 18-24 year old demographic, as whole, have similar
online behaviors and attitudes toward privacy that place them at risk and will guide my design investigation’s purpose and
outcome.

3. Literature Review
 started reading
reflection
participants
18-24 years
cognitive artifact
social networking
Protect Your Digital Privacy:
Survival Skills for the Information Age
Glee Harrah & Cady McGregor
 Things That Make Us Smart
Donald Norman
Grown Up Digital
Don Tapscott
Imagination and play
in the electronic age
Singer, Dorothy G.
Privacy Nudges
Lorrie Faith Cranor, director of the Carnegie Mellon Usable
Privacy and Security Laboratory at Carnegie Mellon University
Visceral Nudges
Ryan Calo, fellow at the Center for Internet and Society at
Stanford Law School
 Cyberpsychology
Kent L. Norman
 Privacy as a Behavioral Phenomenon
Journal of Science Issues
 World Without Secrets
Richard Hunter
Designing Interaction: Psychology at
the Human-Computer Interface
John M. Carroll
The second self : computers
and the human spirit
Sherry Turkle
The Cognitive Artifacts of Designing
Willemien Visser
Relevant
Projects
11.08.10 Thesis References
Laura Janet Rodriguez