User talk:Digitalkitty

This is my wikibooks user discussion page. I will be exploring wikibooks and adding my results to this page. Please feel free to leave contributions in order to help me learn more for my class project. Digitalkitty (discuss • contribs) 14:15, 16 February 2016 (UTC)

The thing about online shopping is that people constantly look to the negatives of it.
It is argued to have a massive impact on depression as it encourages an easy-access to bank accounts. It also causes worries for fraud as it can become harder to keep track of what you have spent let alone whether or not others are spending your money as well. Also, online shopping has had a very negative impact on physical stores, causing many to close down and events such a Black Friday (UK) to be taken off of the physical market. However, it is not as horrid as people make it out to be. There are always two sides to an argument, especially when it comes to shopping. Easy-access bank accounts can make you feel safe about how the bank is on constant look out for fraud and an estimated nine times out of ten, the bank’s will catch the fraud before it goes any further. Moreover, some people argue that they pay more attention to their account when they are continuously spending from it. The impact online shopping shows on physical stores remains in the negatives. Yet it is not uncommon for shop owners to move to the internet although the general public would prefer the actual physical store to remain instead. In terms of events such as Black Friday (UK), it is arguably better for the public’s health and safety that it has been taken to the online market. Instead of breaking out into fights in mass-crowding, people are able to safely click on their chosen item in a safer environment. The atmosphere and spirit of the Black Friday (UK) event, where people are able to bag some of the greatest bargains they could imagine, does not leave the public even though it has left the physical stores. It does not leave the market in a spiral of depression as the products are still being sold. Digitalkitty (discuss • contribs) 11:56, 17 February 2016 (UTC)

Marker's Comment

 * A fairly well-written entry. It would have been useful to try to feed this into the themes and concerns of the module e.g explicitly linking your implications of consumer culture to cultural determinism, or perhaps to aspects of online identity which align with our identities (and data profiles?) as consumers. There is a real effort to attempt to construct an argument here – and this is to be encouraged. However, you write a number of times that “it is argued” or that “some people say”. Ok – who?! Always cite sources – there are a number of relevant scholarly sources which enjoin this discussion and drawing from this material (as well as linking to it using the markup) would have improved this entry considerably. As it stands, a little off topic. Also, you were required to comment on other people's work??? Posts and coments carry equal weighting - you know this, as it's included in the assessment brief.


 * A post of this standard roughly corresponds to the following grade descriptor:
 * Poor. Among other things, poor entries may just offer links without real comment or apparent point. They may offer nothing more than poor-quality synopsis or description of material of dubious relevance. They may have serious clarity problems (including dead links, random graphics) which affect comprehension (or even worse, admin warnings or take-down notices for copyright infringement). They might be off-topic, private trivia, or of unclear relevance. The wiki markup formatting will be of a poor standard. GregXenon01 (discuss • contribs) 15:00, 26 February 2016 (UTC)

As you said, there are always two sides to a story and I'm personally part of an indecisive group of people that uses both the physical shop and the online one, often complementing the two in the shopping experience. Having had always a preference for knowing what I'm buying, choosing it myself after having seen it, it could seem that my opinion would be biased and against online shopping, but actually, I never had to complain about an order. Every time I bought something online, paying extra care to the size-chart, I never had to return a delivery and never was I disappointed. On the other hand, I have seen and disliked the little care some shops put in their displays and the disattention in handling clothes themselves. As always there is a general apprehension for the new, with stories circulating the web that could put off potential buyers. Have you seen for example on medias like facebook how people show pictures of an item as presented online and then in real life? I don't know if you agree, but personally in most of those cases I blame the unrealistic expectations of the buyer (an overly strange, risky design of dress; not paying attention to the body type we have; personal preferences and opinions; usual style of dressing; eccetera) and why not, unlucky, might be a matter of chance (there always will be a faulty product somewhere). Juliabutgiulia (discuss • contribs) 14:20, 18 February 2016 (UTC)

I agree that there is a lot of stigma surrounding online shopping, unless you’re buying from a well-known vendor then there’s always the risk that you won’t receive what you’ve ordered. Personally if I can I will choose to go into a store and buy whatever it is that I want, to me it’s easier and more useful if I can see the product and determine if it’s something that I want to spend money on. The security aspect of your post is really interesting though because I believe that might be one of the biggest reasons why people may be hesitant to buy things online. Personally I believe it’s about doing proper research if it’s a less well-known vendor, and ensuring that people in the past have not had any seriously bad experiences with them. TrishEl (discuss • contribs) 11:24, 19 February 2016 (UTC)

I personally shop online more often than going to a physical shop purely because there is a vaster range of choices, from shops such as ASOS who are only online to other shops selling certain products only online. I find it much easier than going to a shop. I also think online shopping is good as you are able to see the products being sold in shops online before having to go in. It is so much more convenient. I do agree that it can cause worry for fraud but that can also happen in shops if you are paying by card. I really enjoyed this article and found it very interesting! SophieNHayes (discuss • contribs) 11:35, 19 February 2016 (UTC)

Wiki Exercise #2: Visibility and Online Footprint
Online visibility can be determined in different ways as even with a private setting, you are still visible to those you accept onto your profiles. It is best to keep a minimum amount of details on all online platforms to prevent such things as identity theft. This includes forms such as photographs, text and even re-blogging posts by other people. As a personal example, my online profiles (Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, Snapchat and Tumblr) have much less information about my life than they used to. This is because about three quarters of employers have started to search for Facebook profiles in order to determine a more realistic work ethic. In order to increase my chances of employment it is a safer and smarter choice to not post everything that happens – nights out drinking, for example – to the likes of Facebook. In saying this, although my Facebook profile is private, it still allows followers to see my posts. Followers on Facebook cannot comment on statuses or pictures but are still able to view them. This is unlike Twitter, Tumblr and Instagram as these three platforms allow users to comment on all texts and photos as well as re-blog and “like” them. In comparison to my Facebook and Snapchat account, which is mainly closed off to close friends and family, my other social media platforms are open to not just the general public but the wider world. On one hand, this allows the mind to expand and open as it enables people to connect on an international level. On the other hand, however, it subjugates me, and others like me, to a more serious and threatening exposure. Multiple online platforms are owned by the same company, such as Facebook owning Instagram, and due to this, users are subject to the terms and conditions that follow. A better example would be Snapchat. The initial idea behind snapchat is that you can send a photo which another person could see for a minimum of 2 seconds and a maximum of 10 seconds, meaning the picture would not remain for the rest of the world to see. However, Snapchat invented a feature that allows users to screenshot the pictures they receive, enabling them to retain the photo and post it to wherever the receiver wishes. The company also receives all content and data sent out. This suggests that there is no real control over anything posted on online media platforms and that visibility is a more severe concern than what it is initially thought to be. Digitalkitty (discuss • contribs) 10:46, 2 March 2016 (UTC)

Wiki Exercise #3: Information Overload!
It has become difficult to be a student in a world of technology. Distractions are guaranteed. Social media and apps on mobile phones make it almost unbearable to not connect to the wider-web. There is a catapult of information waiting to fly at us the second we log on. The internet has become an addiction. It has actually become a higher addiction than that of alcohol and drugs. It entices the mind with the unknown and the fact that the unknown is now so easily in reach. We are constantly connected with technology. It is easy to be distracted which can cause more stress than necessary.

Initially for me, multi-tasking was the first form used to deal with distractions. It made me believe that the distractions were not real as I would be somewhat focusing on my assignment at the same time. However, it has been revealed by researcher Zehn Wang that multi-tasking is only beneficial for the feeling of satisfaction for finishing assignments. Instead I focus on making sure all notifications on my phone are turned off, or even having days with no technology at all so that I can clear my mind. When studying, I will use pen and paper as it is more relaxing because there is no temptation, as there would be with a laptop, computer or tablet. It is obvious that we live in a world that is based on an ADHD system and it takes a lot of effort to pay attention. Therefore meditation is the best way to let my mind relax and breathe. It helps sharpen the mind and decrease any anxieties or stressful thoughts.

However, Psychologists have discovered that “inhibiting distractions is a core skill for staying focused” as it shows that your brain is aware of what you should be focusing on and is not in a passive state of mind. Distractions can also be good as they allow you to divert your attention from a stressful topic and focus on something more fun.

Nonetheless the stressful worry will still remain after the distraction is over, which is why it is best to focus on the topic at hand first. Digitalkitty (discuss • contribs)

I liked the idea you put forward that the Internet is more addictive than alcohol or drugs, although I would have left a reference to prove this statement as it is quite a controversial statement. The point you made about a "catapult of information" is terrifying and true. A phone could die on you or you forget it for a day and then by the time you get back to it you could have 6 messages and 20 Facebook notifications, I know this from personal experience. I would also ask have you ever heard of the program self control? You just download it to your laptop and it can block any sites that would distract you from your task for a set amount of time. Really worth looking into, especially in regard to this topic. GlasgowTexan (discuss • contribs) 11:02, 4 March 2016 (UTC)


 * Hey I really enjoyed your post, and the links to some of the psychological studies were really insightful. I too find myself pondering whether or not distractions are healthy when trying to revise or write. I sway between the two, but have found that as I get older I am finding it easier to work around other people or outside influences - I don't know whether or not this is because I have become accustomed to the University lifestyle or I am just more responsible and less enthralled by what is around me. Do you think that now children are using smartphone technology from a much younger age, that this will in turn affect how easily distracted they are in the future? The more I use my phone the more I feel that I am dependent on it; surely that means that children today are going to be far more easily distracted as they have been conditioned into having this dependency? Banddcole (discuss • contribs) 11:30, 11 March 2016 (UTC)

Hey, thanks for your comment. I don't think the use of smartphones will cause children to become more distracted as their minds are constantly distracted. One of the main counter-arguments I like to make is that if we had the chance to use the technology we have now at a younger age we would have jumped at the chance. So I'd suggest it's not more distracting than anything else that's new, for children anyway. Digitalkitty (discuss • contribs) 11:40, 11 March 2016 (UTC)

Wiki Exercise #4: Wikibook Project Reflective Account
Throughout the past few months I have worked in a group as a part of the Wikibook project called An Internet of Everything? It was a Film and Media based assignment from the University of Stirling and the groups were chosen by the students. I found this a more difficult progress than putting groups into random as this was my first semester studying Film and Media and so I did not know as many people as the others did. This meant that I was one of the last people to find a group and it ended up being a rather big group of about seven people. We then found difficulty meeting face-to-face. We used social media sites such as Facebook to begin conversing as a lot of people were still yet to understand how to navigate the Wikibooks material. We were also left behind in a sense, as we were not made aware that the reading week counted as the first week to begin on our Wikibook page. However, we were not the only group to be put in this position and I think that gave us a little bit of hope as we started our research. I also feel that the bigger groups gave us a better advantage as it meant more people were able to help each other out in terms of research. In addition, we were able to successfully converse over the discussion page and even managed to format a table of what our group was doing and what we would help other groups with. That was another part that confused us however, as there were groups working from other classes on the exact same page as us, it seemed like a better idea to make one big groups spread throughout so that we could easily decide who would write what - instead of having about three groups wanting to write the same thing.

I do believe that the Wikibook was a good assessment as it encouraged students to actually learn about the topics we were told to study in lectures. It also gave an insight into a production process, which can be followed on in further module of the Film and Media course. My group focused on Sousveillance and Surveillance, and were surprised by how much we did not already know. This was especially for things like Sousveillance, where we noticed that every report made was a different form of it. Also, formats like YouTube turned out, after more thorough discussion, to be closer to Surveillance than we initially thought.

The idea of using cognitive surplus, a topic we later had to learn about, was definitely a good one. However I would suggest that next time we do the WikiTasks before starting the WikiBooks project as it would allow us to truly focus on the assessment and not simply write anything to get the task done in due time.

To conclude, the Wikibooks project is something I found enjoyable, but like most things it has its tweaks. Digitalkitty (discuss • contribs) 11:18, 6 April 2016 (UTC)

COMMENTS

I find your point about discovering and learning new aspects of the chosen topic. I was also writing and researching about sousveillance/surveillance, and through this task I did realise how much was out there that fell under this umbrella category. I would also agree with your point about how the tasks were structured, as it felt disjointed to complete the small tasks in between doing the wikibook project. Justalex 28 (discuss • contribs) 21:10, 8 April 2016 (UTC)

Marker’s Feedback on Wikibook Project Work
There's evidence that you have understood some of the affordances and challenges of using Wikibooks for an academic assignment, and it is positive to see that you have gone to the Teahouse when faced with a problem. There's further evidence of engagement through your interaction with peers and working on editing the page to be coherent near the deadline. While there is some engagement with secondary reading, this needs to be tied to stronger referencing. This contributes to a fairly good understanding of module themes although you could approach topics in greater detail in places.

Content (weighted 20%)

 * Your contribution to the book page gives a satisfactory brief overview of the subject under discussion in your chosen themed chapter. There is a fair range of concepts associated with your subject, and an effort to deliver critical definitions. There is evidence that you draw from relevant literature and scholarship, however your own critical voice in the building of a robust argument is slightly lost, perhaps due to a variable depth of understanding the subject matter or over reliance on rote learning. The primary and secondary sources you found about the chapter’s themes cover a somewhat circumscribed range and depth of subject matter.

Understanding (weighted 30%)

 * Reading and research:
 * evidence of critical engagement with set materials, although some ideas and procedures more securely grasped than others
 * evidence of independent reading of somewhat circumscribed range of appropriate academic and peer-reviewed material
 * Argument and analysis:
 * well-articulated and well-supported argument featuring variable depth of understanding
 * satisfactory level of evidence of critical thinking (through taking a position in relation to key ideas from the module, and supporting this position in discussion);
 * satisfactory level of evidence of relational thinking (through making connections between key ideas from the module and wider literature, and supporting these connections in discussion);
 * evidence of variable independent critical ability

Engagement (weighted 50%)

 * Evidence from contributions to both editing and discussion of content to an appreciable standard (i.e. volume and breadth of activity as evidenced through contribs)
 * Good engagement with and learning from other Wikipedians about the task of writing/editing content for a Wikibook
 * Reflexive, creative and well-managed use of discussion pages using deployment of judgement relating to key issues, concepts and procedures

Overall Mark % available on Succeed

FMSU9A4marker (discuss • contribs) 14:48, 3 May 2016 (UTC)