Find research datasets worth reusing
Search datasets from major research repositories and use ShareScore to quickly assess how well each record supports discovery, access, and reuse.
5
datasets available to search
ShareScore release 0.9.0
Dataset results
5 results for “Social tagging”
How Confidence in Prior Attitudes, Social Tag Popularity, and Source Credibility Shape Confirmation Bias Toward Antidepressants and Psychotherapy in a Representative German Sample: Randomized Controlled Web-Based Study
<p>ABSTRACT</p> <p>Background: In health-related, Web-based information search, people should select information in line with expert (vs nonexpert) information, independent of their prior attitudes and consequent confirmation bias.</p> <p>Objective: This study aimed to investigate confirmation bias in mental health–related information search, particularly (1) if high confidence worsens confirmation bias, (2) if social tags eliminate the influence of prior attitudes, and (3) if people successfully distinguish high and low source credibility.</p> <p>Methods: In total, 520 participants of a representative sample of the German Web-based population were recruited via a panel company. Among them, 48.1% (250/520) participants completed the fully automated study. Participants provided <em>prior attitudes</em> about antidepressants and psychotherapy. We manipulated (1) <em>confidence</em> in prior attitudes when participants searched for blog posts about the treatment of depression, (2) <em>tag popularity</em> —either psychotherapy or antidepressant tags were more popular, and (3) <em>source credibility</em> with banners indicating high or low expertise of the tagging community. We measured <em>tag</em> and <em>blog post</em> selection, and <em>treatment</em><em>efficacy ratings</em> after navigation.</p> <p>Results: Tag popularity predicted the proportion of selected antidepressant tags (beta=.44, SE 0.11; <em>P</em><.001) and blog posts (beta=.46, SE 0.11; <em>P</em><.001). When confidence was low (−1 SD), participants selected more blog posts consistent with prior attitudes (beta=−.26, SE 0.05; <em>P</em><.001). Moreover, when confidence was low (−1 SD) and source credibility was high (+1 SD), the efficacy ratings of attitude-consistent treatments increased (beta=.34, SE 0.13; <em>P</em>=.01).</p> <p>Conclusions: We found correlational support for defense motivation account underlying confirmation bias in the mental health–related search context. That is, participants tended to select information that supported their prior attitudes, which is not in line with the current scientific evidence. Implications for presenting persuasive Web-based information are also discussed.</p> <p>Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03899168; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03899168 (Archived by WebCite at http://www.webcitation.org/77Nyot3Do)</p> <p>J Med Internet Res 2019;21(4):e11081</p> <p>doi:10.2196/11081</p>
Confirmation Bias in Web-Based Search: A Randomized Online Study on the Effects of Expert Information and Social Tags on Information Search and Evaluation
<p>ABSTRACT</p> <p>Background: The public typically believes psychotherapy to be more effective than pharmacotherapy for depression treatments. This is not consistent with current scientific evidence, which shows that both types of treatment are about equally effective.</p> <p>Objective: The study investigates whether this bias towards psychotherapy guides online information search and whether the bias can be reduced by explicitly providing expert information (in a blog entry) and by providing tag clouds that implicitly reveal experts’ evaluations.</p> <p>Methods: A total of 174 participants completed a fully automated Web-based study after we invited them via mailing lists. First, participants read two blog posts by experts that either challenged or supported the bias towards psychotherapy. Subsequently, participants searched for information about depression treatment in an online environment that provided more experts’ blog posts about the effectiveness of treatments based on alleged research findings. These blogs were organized in a tag cloud; both psychotherapy tags and pharmacotherapy tags were popular. We measured tag and blog post selection, efficacy ratings of the presented treatments, and participants’ treatment recommendation after information search.</p> <p>Results: Participants demonstrated a clear bias towards psychotherapy (mean 4.53, SD 1.99) compared to pharmacotherapy (mean 2.73, SD 2.41; <em>t</em><sub>173</sub>=7.67, <em>P</em><.001, <em>d</em>=0.81) when rating treatment efficacy prior to the experiment. Accordingly, participants exhibited biased information search and evaluation. This bias was significantly reduced, however, when participants were exposed to tag clouds with challenging popular tags. Participants facing popular tags challenging their bias (n=61) showed significantly less biased tag selection (<em>F</em><sub>2,168</sub>=10.61, <em>P</em><.001, partial eta squared=0.112), blog post selection (<em>F</em><sub>2,168</sub>=6.55, <em>P</em>=.002, partial eta squared=0.072), and treatment efficacy ratings (<em>F</em><sub>2,168</sub>=8.48, <em>P</em><.001, partial eta squared=0.092), compared to bias-supporting tag clouds (n=56) and balanced tag clouds (n=57). Challenging (n=93) explicit expert information as presented in blog posts, compared to supporting expert information (n=81), decreased the bias in information search with regard to blog post selection (<em>F</em><sub>1,168</sub>=4.32, <em>P</em>=.04, partial eta squared=0.025). No significant effects were found for treatment recommendation (<em>P</em>s>.33).</p> <p>Conclusions: We conclude that the psychotherapy bias is most effectively attenuated—and even eliminated—when popular tags implicitly point to blog posts that challenge the widespread view. Explicit expert information (in a blog entry) was less successful in reducing biased information search and evaluation. Since tag clouds have the potential to counter biased information processing, we recommend their insertion.</p>
"Social Tagging as interpretative production: liminality and information practice "
<p>This paper examines recent approaches to tagging and crowdsourcing as communicative practice, viewing social tagging and crowdsourced annotation <br>as liminal communicative practice that throws into relief many conventional assumptions regarding information roles, actions, performances and<br>functions.<br>In this paper, tags and annotations are viewed as paratextual elements, at one and the same time responses, interpretations and productive communicative<br>gestures linked to other documents, themselves also productions and responses. Taggers operate as readers and writers, consumers and producers.<br>yet currently in most systems the opportunities for tagging and communicative practice are limited to the inclusion of one word tags or masheduptags. There is space for new collaborative tagging models to be developed that draw on richer forms of user generated content, perhaps through storytelling, for example, and that develop the creativity inherent in tagging practice to design enhanced KO models and systems.<br>It is in this context that this paper proposes to examine a range of current tagging and annotation practices, and to discuss novel approaches to the representation of knowledge that capitalise on tagging as liminal, productive and performative information practice.</p>
Faceted navigation of social tagging applications
<p>The goal of this paper is to conduct an analysis of seventeen existing and proposed methodologies for the use of facets in social tagging applications, with particular emphasis placed on the extent to which these methodologies address the following questions:<br> ● How do you choose facets that can apply generally to all subjects in social tagging applications<br> ● How many facets would suffice to cover site members’ needs?<br> ● Who should choose the facets?<br> ● How do you ensure that the facets chosen reflect the needs of the site members?<br> ● How do you maintain the facets and impose quality control over them?<br> Results of this analysis indicate that these methodologies provide insufficient guidelines for the choice, evaluation, and maintenance of the facets.<br> An underlying problem in many of these studies is their lack of clear definitions of what constitutes a facet. The lack of emphasis on the mutual exclusivity of facets is particularly troublesome, since it is perhaps this attribute that would determine the effectiveness of<br> facets in a social tagging application. Most of the proposed methodologies do not address how facets are to be derived or maintained.<br> A proposed framework for a more rigorous approach to the incorporation of facets into social tagging applications is presented to facilitate the use of facet analysis as a bridge between the benefits of the grassroots, bottom-up approach to the selection of tags, and a more controlled and efficient organization and visual browsing of tags in social tagging applications.</p>
Confirmation Bias Towards Treatments of Depressive Disorders in Social Tagging
ClinicalTrials.gov study NCT03899168. IPD Sharing: YES. Countries: 0. Publications: 1.
ScienceDex guides
Understand access before you commit
These curated guides explain access requirements, typical timelines, costs, and reuse considerations for widely used research datasets.
Allen Brain Atlas
Allen Brain Atlas is an Allen Institute collection of brain map atlases, datasets, APIs, and analysis tools covering mouse, human, and non-human primate brain resources.
Annotated Behaviour and Observability Dataset (ABODe)
ABODe is a University of Edinburgh DataShare dataset for behavior classification in group-housed mice using home-cage video, identities, bounding boxes, ground-plate positions, and annotator labels.
DANDI Archive for NWB datasets
DANDI is a BRAIN Initiative archive for publishing and sharing neurophysiology data, including electrophysiology, optophysiology, and behavioral data packaged as NWB and related standards.
International Brain Laboratory public data
The International Brain Laboratory public data releases expose standardized mouse decision-making experiments, including Neuropixels recordings, widefield calcium imaging, behavior, and session metadata accessed through the ONE API.
OpenNeuro
OpenNeuro is a free, open platform for sharing neuroimaging datasets, with public search, dataset pages, and download paths for web, S3, DataLad, and the OpenNeuro CLI.