Week 9

Objectives

  • Data Wrangling and Lo-Fi visualizations
    • This week I’ve been focusing on refining my research question and generating some lo-fi data visualization prototypes, as seen below.

    • I created this cluster graph, which I’m not sure I’ll use in my final report as I don’t belive it to be relevant to my research question(s) at this point. However, I think it’s a cool image as it shows different clusters which represent the different communities citing Paul et al’s findings. Most of these clusters are linked by citations, indicating inter-community awareness.

      A visualization of a citation network. The nodes are marked in red with edges drawn between nodes if they are connected through direct citation. The nodes have been clustered to reflect communities within the papers citing Paul et al. (1963). The node representing Paul et al. (1963) is not included.

    • I also created this stacked bar chart which represents counts of Paul et al.’s breadth and depth within the citation network. It shows that as the overall citation count grows, so does the number of “deep” nodes in the network. While the count of “broad” nodes stabilizes over time, this count becomes a smaller percentage of the overall network. I likely won’t include this chart either as I find it quite difficult to read, but it’s a good starting point for later versions.

  • Data issues: missing dois and matching to Open Citations
    • I discovered that much of the data used in Leng (2022) are missing digital object identifiers (DOIs). Dois are used to assign publications a unique code which can be used to identify that publication on the web. However, the publications that make up the data I’m working with were published in the 1960s-1970s and weren’t highly influential, as such, these documents weren’t assigned DOIs retroactively. All of these articles have Web of Science IDs, and most of them are on Scopus, but I’m running into an issue of how to confirm the validity of my data.

UIUC Seminar

This week’s panel topic was “Personas” and the panelists were Drs. Saugata Ghose, Ranjitha Kumar, and Ling Ren. The panelists discussed a variety of topics related to the idea of “persona” from online branding, to inter-personal relationships, to ethics. The most helpful advice I got from the panel (from Dr. Kumar) was to figure out what your story is. Similar to an elevator pitch, but more focused on who you are rather than what you do. What makes you stand out? Or alternatively, what makes you fit in? It didn’t occur to me that you might want to tailor your approach based on the audience, but it makes sense. My question, then, is how to do so.

Written on July 15, 2022