Difference between revisions of "Submissions:2019/Fringe theories and edit histories: Six tips for critical information literacy on health topics with Wikipedia"
Shameran81 (talk | contribs) |
Shameran81 (talk | contribs) (improved entry) |
||
| Line 2: | Line 2: | ||
|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=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). |
+ | |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. |
| ⚫ | 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. |
||
| − | While the internet is a powerful resource for seekers, not all information is fully accessible on the open web. Meanwhile, fringe theories about health and wellness persist. The recent measles outbreak is evidence of a breakdown in public trust in vaccines and herd immunity. |
||
| − | While Wikipedia 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 collaborative editing on biomedical topics. |
||
| − | |||
| ⚫ | This talk |
||
| − | |||
| − | In addition, the talk will present an overview of the OCLC Wikipedia + Libraries: Health and Medical Information fall course, 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. |
||
Course: |
Course: |
||
Revision as of 18:08, 23 September 2019
This submission has been noted and is pending review for WikiConference North America 2019.
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:
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.
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.
Course:
- Wikipedia + Libraries: Health and Medical Information https://www.webjunction.org/news/webjunction/course-wikipedia-health-and-medical-information.html
Sources:
- “Health Fact Sheet.” 2013. Internet Project. Pew Research Center. https://www.pewinternet.org/2013/01/15/health-online-2013/.
- Neal, Diane M, and Pamela J McKenzie. 2011. “Putting the Pieces Together: Endometriosis Blogs, Cognitive Authority, and Collaborative Information Behavior.” Journal of the Medical Library Association : JMLA 99 (2): 127–34. https://doi.org/10.3163/1536-5050.99.2.004.
- Rowley, Jennifer, and Frances Johnson. 2013. “Understanding Trust Formation in Digital Information Sources: The Case of Wikipedia.” Journal of Information Science 39 (4): 494–508. https://doi.org/10.1177/0165551513477820.
Academic Peer Review option:
- No
Author name:
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!