Difference between revisions of "Submissions:2019/Fringe theories and edit histories: Six tips for critical information literacy on health topics with Wikipedia"

From WikiConference North America
Jump to navigation Jump to search
(improved entry)
 
(6 intermediate revisions by 2 users not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
 
{{WCNA 2019 Session Submission
  
{{WCNA 2019 Session Submission
  +
|status=Declined
 
|theme=Reliability of Information<br />+ Relationship Building & Support<br />+ Inclusion and Diversity<br />
  
|theme=Reliability of Information<br />+ Relationship Building & Support<br />+ Inclusion and Diversity<br />
 
|type=Presentation
  
|type=Presentation
  +
|abstract=
⚫
|abstract=Searching for information on health or medical topics is the third most popular online activity (Pew Research, 2014). People often seek supplemental or easy-to-read information as well as affective communities to help them cope with anxieties, questions, or concerns about their health, or the health of people they know (Neal and McKenzie 2011). While the open web is a powerful resource for information seekers, not all resources are fully accessible, many are closed behind paywalls. Wikipedia is a popular place for health information seekers. And while the collaborative encyclopedia is not meant to provide medical advice, editors know Wikipedia entries often top search results. Wikipedians have devoted attention to developing and monitoring robust guidelines (WP:MEDRS) to aid editing on biomedical topics, including entries on alternative medicine. These guidelines help ensure available information accurately reflect consensus in the medical and scientific community by using third-party secondary sources. While this is important, fringe or alternative theories about health and wellness persist. The recent measles outbreak is evidence of a breakdown in public trust in vaccines and herd immunity, raising questions about how and why expanded access to information in on-and offline can influence health literacies and thus informing choices that parents make for children.
 
   
  +
Slides https://drive.google.com/file/d/1h_evSF_B0UnUaVd7oWobYTUUg4DZ1qjl/view?usp=sharing for lightning talk version.<br><br>
⚫
This talk offers a pedagogy for critical information literacy for skeptical information seekers by fully embracing how Wikipedia is a complex participatory community embedded in a commercial internet ecosystem. Based on research on affective, aesthetic, and social ways that internet users accept as reliable the information they encounter on Wikipedia (see Rowley and Johnson, 2013), this talk presents specific techniques and case studies (about topics such as vaccines, pseudoscience/fringe theories, supplements, and articles in women’s health) as a way to foster critical information literacy about health and medical topics. In giving this talk, I will also present an overview of the OCLC Wikipedia + Libraries: Health and Medical Information course delivered in fall 2019, which is an NNLM-sponsored OCLC WebJunction course for public library staff. I developed this curriculum as a Wikipedia consultant in Spring/Fall 2019, a subsection of the course is the basis of this talk. I wish to note my viewpoints are my own and do not represent OCLC or NNLM. This talk should be of interest to WIkipedians, librarians, educators, outreach coordinators, all who may be curious about an approach to addressing questions of credibility and trust that incorporate theories of the psychic experience of the information seeker.
 
  ⚫
Searching for information on health or medical topics is the third most popular online activity (Pew Research, 2014). People often seek supplemental or easy-to-read information as well as affective communities to help them cope with anxieties, questions, or concerns about their health, or the health of people they know (Neal and McKenzie 2011). Though the open web excludes paywalled and offline resources, it is a powerful, accessible resource. Wikipedia, the free and open encyclopedia, frequently tops search results. While the collaborative encyclopedia is not meant to provide medical advice, editors know Wikipedia entries are popular. Wikipedians have devoted attention to developing and monitoring robust guidelines (WP:MEDRS) to aid collaborative editing on biomedical topics, including entries on alternative medicine. These guidelines help ensure information accurately summarizes consensus in the scientific community by using verifiable third-party secondary sources. While this is important for the Wikipedia community, fringe or alternative theories about health and wellness persist in the public at large. The recent measles outbreak is evidence of a breakdown in public trust in the vaccine schedule and herd immunity, which raises more general questions about how and to what extent expanded access to information on-and off-line can strengthen health and medical information literacies.
  +
  ⚫
This talk offers a pedagogy for critical information literacies for skeptical searchers by fully embracing how Wikipedia is a complex participatory community embedded in a commercial internet ecosystem. I'll explain the meaning of critical information literacy and summarize research on affective, aesthetic, and social ways that internet users accept as reliable the information they encounter on Wikipedia (see Rowley and Johnson, 2013); then I'll present six specific techniques and case studies (about topics such as vaccines, pseudoscience/fringe theories, supplements, and articles in women’s health) that can foster critical information literacy about health and medical topics in educational settings, such as library training programs. In giving this talk, I will also describe the OCLC Wikipedia + Libraries: Health and Medical Information course delivered in fall 2019, which is an NNLM-sponsored OCLC WebJunction course for public library staff. I developed this curriculum as a Wikipedia consultant in Spring/Fall 2019, a subsection of the course is the basis of this talk. I wish to note my viewpoints are my own and do not represent OCLC or NNLM. This talk may be of interest to all of us in the Wikimedia movement concerned about the ways that social and psychological processes impact the circulation, credibility and authority of information, and also curious about possible ways that literacies in Wikipedia's inner workings can be marshaled to deepen critical literacies for editors and non-editors alike.
   
   
Line 23: Line 27:
 
|size=30
  
|size=30
 
|requests=Presentation projector, screen etc.
  
|requests=Presentation projector, screen etc.
−
|presented=Not yet (will run course on Wikipedia + Libraries: Health and Medical Information in fall 2019.
 +
|presented=Not yet (will run course on Wikipedia + Libraries: Health and Medical Information in fall 2019)
 
|present-other=Perhaps!
  
|present-other=Perhaps!
 
}}
  
}}

Latest revision as of 06:11, 8 November 2019

Due to limited space, WikiConference North America 2019 unfortunately could not accommodate this submission in its program this year.
Please check out our Unconference for opportunities to present and share there.



Etherpad

Title:

Fringe theories and edit histories: Six tips for critical information literacy on health topics with Wikipedia

Theme:

Reliability of Information
+ Relationship Building & Support
+ Inclusion and Diversity

Type of session:

Presentation

Abstract:

Slides https://drive.google.com/file/d/1h_evSF_B0UnUaVd7oWobYTUUg4DZ1qjl/view?usp=sharing for lightning talk version.

Searching for information on health or medical topics is the third most popular online activity (Pew Research, 2014). People often seek supplemental or easy-to-read information as well as affective communities to help them cope with anxieties, questions, or concerns about their health, or the health of people they know (Neal and McKenzie 2011). Though the open web excludes paywalled and offline resources, it is a powerful, accessible resource. Wikipedia, the free and open encyclopedia, frequently tops search results. While the collaborative encyclopedia is not meant to provide medical advice, editors know Wikipedia entries are popular. Wikipedians have devoted attention to developing and monitoring robust guidelines (WP:MEDRS) to aid collaborative editing on biomedical topics, including entries on alternative medicine. These guidelines help ensure information accurately summarizes consensus in the scientific community by using verifiable third-party secondary sources. While this is important for the Wikipedia community, fringe or alternative theories about health and wellness persist in the public at large. The recent measles outbreak is evidence of a breakdown in public trust in the vaccine schedule and herd immunity, which raises more general questions about how and to what extent expanded access to information on-and off-line can strengthen health and medical information literacies.

This talk offers a pedagogy for critical information literacies for skeptical searchers by fully embracing how Wikipedia is a complex participatory community embedded in a commercial internet ecosystem. I'll explain the meaning of critical information literacy and summarize research on affective, aesthetic, and social ways that internet users accept as reliable the information they encounter on Wikipedia (see Rowley and Johnson, 2013); then I'll present six specific techniques and case studies (about topics such as vaccines, pseudoscience/fringe theories, supplements, and articles in women’s health) that can foster critical information literacy about health and medical topics in educational settings, such as library training programs. In giving this talk, I will also describe the OCLC Wikipedia + Libraries: Health and Medical Information course delivered in fall 2019, which is an NNLM-sponsored OCLC WebJunction course for public library staff. I developed this curriculum as a Wikipedia consultant in Spring/Fall 2019, a subsection of the course is the basis of this talk. I wish to note my viewpoints are my own and do not represent OCLC or NNLM. This talk may be of interest to all of us in the Wikimedia movement concerned about the ways that social and psychological processes impact the circulation, credibility and authority of information, and also curious about possible ways that literacies in Wikipedia's inner workings can be marshaled to deepen critical literacies for editors and non-editors alike.


Course:

Sources:

Academic Peer Review option:

No

Author name:

Monika M Sengul-Jones

E-mail address:

jones.monika@gmail.com

Wikimedia username:

Shameran81

Affiliated organization(s):

Estimated time:

20

Preferred room size:

30

Special requests:

Presentation projector, screen etc.

Have you presented on this topic previously? If yes, where/when?:

Not yet (will run course on Wikipedia + Libraries: Health and Medical Information in fall 2019)

If your submission is not accepted, would you be open to presenting your topic in another part of the program? (e.g. lightning talk or unconference session)

Perhaps!


Retrieved from "https://wikiconference.org/index.php?title=Submissions:2019/Fringe_theories_and_edit_histories:_Six_tips_for_critical_information_literacy_on_health_topics_with_Wikipedia&oldid=15101"