The Guardian on homophily
From Ethan Zuckerman's blog post.The topic is "homophily," the "faintly depressing human tendency to seek out and spend time with those most similar to us." Homophily informs whom we spent time with and filters our understanding of the wider world. As the author writes, his American friends were sure Obama was going to win:
"[T]hey hadn't met one person—not one!—who planned on voting Republican. They were right about the outcome, of course. But 58m people voted against Obama; it was just that you didn't run into them in the coffee shops of Brooklyn."Quoting the Harvard sociologist Ethan Zuckerman that "Homophily causes ignorance," Burkeman adds that it tends to make people more extreme. The internet can increase the effect, allowing dittoheads of various persuasions to "exist almost entirely within a feedback loop shaped by your own preferences."*
Burkeman closes by recommending the LibraryThing Unsuggester:
"You don't need technology to do that, but then again, technology needn't be the enemy: Facebook could easily offer a list of the People You're Least Likely To Know; imagine what that could do for cross-cultural understanding. And I love the Unsuggester, a feature of the books site LibraryThing.com: enter a book you've recently read, and it'll provide a list of titles least likely to appear alongside it on other people's bookshelves. Tell it you're a fan of Kant's Critique Of Pure Reason, and it'll suggest you read Confessions Of A Shopaholic by Sophie Kinsella. And maybe you should."The topic is interesting to me from a number of different angles. First, as a social network that works largely through shared reading, LibraryThing gets the upside of homophily and is subject to the downside too.
Second, with Zuckerman, I've fascinated by the notion of serendipity, of "surprising someone helpfully." As I've argued to library audiences in the past, both Amazon-style collaborative filtering and contemporary library catalogs are bad at serendipity—worse, in some ways, than browsing physical shelves can be. As Zuckerman notes, the somewhat mechanical process of subject assignment can break through the "flocking together" tendency of collaborative filtering. But I bet there are better ways too. Is a true "serendipity algorithm" possible?
Third, my own experience is characterized by some rather vexed homophily issues. Zuckerman mentions "02138" at one point, no doubt baffling some internet listeners. It is, of course, the zipcode of Harvard and much of west Cambridge, where I grew up and spent most of my life. A popular t-shirt (I own one) proclaims "02138: The World's Most Opinionated Zip Code,"** but there can be no mistaking that opinions largely go one way. Growing up in Cambridge, and attending a certain private school, taught me that respect for diversity was at the center of human virtues—something I still agree with—but that everyone had houses filled with books***, Volvo was the nation's most popular automaker, that large families and stay-at-home mothers were suspect, that religion was for mental defectives, that Mondale was going to win in 1984, and so forth. In a very real way Cambridge taught me how to think—and I've spent the rest of my life thinking through what to keep and what to chuck.
For more on this topic, check out:
- Homophily, serendipity, xenophilia. Long, thoughtful blog post by Ethan Zuckerman.
- Technologies and Emerging Democracies: Building a Better Gatekeeper. Wonderful short talk by Zuckerman.
*David Weinberger has a very good reply somewhere—in Everything is Miscellaneous?—where David argues (as I recall) that this is an unrealistic notion. Conversations happen because of shared ground. I shall avoid thumbnailing any more because I shall surely get it wrong.
**See Flickr user Nabeel_H for the motto on a window, allegedly quoting the NYT. 02138 is now also the title of a Magazine for Harvard Alumni (see it). As a lifelong resident of 02138, but not a Harvard Alumnus, I am considerably irritated that four-years residence in that second-rate sausage factory gives people the right to claim my zipcode.
***Certain books, mind you. I am a great connoisseur of Cambridge bookshelves.
Labels: amazon, ethan zuckerman, homophily, social networking
14 Comments:
I dare suggest that you might scare up some controversy with that "second-rate sausage factory" bit. :-)
Not that I have opinions on the subject, one way or the other.
I know this is a little bit of old news, but Ethan Zuckerman spoke at the 2008 New England Library Conference, and talked about much of what is mentioned in this post. He was a phenomenal speaker, and definitely got the attention of all the librarians in the audience. The notes from is talk are on the NELA blog - he too referenced the Unsuggester.
Oh, I didn't know that. I'll check out his notes!
Re; Sausages.
As I remarked once before, Harvard rejected me twice (BA and PhD). They are still tops, but I get to tease them...
If you really want to be depressed by homophily, look in the LT database. Compute the average number of books owned whose author's last name starts with the letter H. Then compute the average for people whose last name starts with H and I'd bet it'll be higher.
"Travel is fatal to prejudice, bigotry and narrow-mindedness, and many of our people need it sorely on these accounts. Broad, wholesome, charitable views of men and things can not be acquired by vegetating in one little corner of the earth all one's lifetime."
- Mark Twain, from the conclusion to ''Innocents Abroad'' (1869)
Tim,
This is one of the more interesting and thought-provoking posts I've read in a while (even from you ;-)). It sort of puts the finger on something I have found really hard to codify or express in terms of the recent election. It felt like indeed, noone but imbeciles could possibly vote for a Republican in the online venues I participate in, esp. Facebook. Oh, and by the way, I come from a large family, I am a person of faith (NOT, I hope, religious -- there's a big difference), and my wife is a stay-at-home mom. We even have the audacity to homeschool most of our children!
You talk about the upsides and the downsides of homophily; and another poster here has quoted MArk Twain on the benefits of travel. Well, it seems to me that the Net in general and LT in particular can help defuse this, even whilst it reinforces it in other ways. For instance: your t-shirt about the zip code is meaningless to me, because as a Brit I know nothing of these 'zip codes' of which you speak. So even though I am sure we have very many commonalities between us - I do have a house full of books as do many of my friends both on and off the Net; and I was very pleased to see Obama elected - our viewpoints are bound to be different simply because of 4000+ miles of separation.
And LT has its role in defusing homophily as well. I suspect that very few of us only have the one obsession; except, of course, that we collect books on our different obsessions. So even if we find we talk to people of similar mind through LT, a quick tour through our libraries will show that we all have different perspectives on a range of subjects beyond the one that unites us. And you don't even need the Unsuggester for that!
Is a true "serendipity algorithm" possible?
Yes, Tim, and you wrote the code: Random Work, Random LT Member, etc.
No, I think you're missing the distinction between randomness and serendipity. Mechanical subject indexing produces some serendipity by bringing very different books together that share some significant subject element. Unconstrained collaborative filtering can introduce serendipity between items that have no rational subject connection, but are owned by the same people. Serendipity is finding a book through some unexpected, unpredictable silver thread that runs through the items. It's not reaching into a barrel for a random name.
If you say so. Well, then, here's your serendipity algorithm:
(.45)Mechanical subject indexing
+ (.45)Unconstrained collaborative filtering
+ (.05)which books are physically next to each other on the Library of Congress stacks
+ (.15)pure randomness.
You're welcome, but I want a 90% cut.
- Carnophile
Ahem.
- (1.0) as a penalty for not having weights sum to unity.
Carn
Regarding the recent election, I live in Tennessee. I felt like I was the only person voting for Obama. On the subject of homophily, I've always wondered if LT has statistics on how many people in forums add books (which presumably they buy, read at the library, or add to their wishlists) after they read a post mentioning it. In other words, how much value does LT have as an advertising tool, albeit one with no paid advertisement?
Having traveled through most of the U.S.A., I couldn't agree more with the idea that homophily stunts personal growth. Each corner I've visited is as distinct from another. Each one too believes that they are "America", the alpha & the omega. This thought is even more entrenched on the East & West Coasts. NYC & L.A. as it were.
It's nice to finally have terms to go with what I've witnessed.
Post a Comment
<< Home