Punished by Rewards
Tuesday, April 14th, 2009 07:06 amSabina and I were talking about points systems on websites, such as Blip.fm's blips, and whether this created negative social effects. She argued that the existence of such systems prompted users to play it as a game/play purely for points, and also explained to me the secret of getting props and being uber-popular on Blip. I was excited because I thought she was going to reveal to me which bands are the hippest or something, but actually the secret is to reblip the popular and prolific people, and blip a lot yourself, and follow the popular folk. However, what really prompts people to play blip.fm, or another service, as a game?
Is it the appearance of metrics? Yet, LJ also has metrics: comment count, and # of people friending you. I certainly use comments as a metric and believe getting them does measure my 'success' in some manner. Probably blips were created to be a game, to get people to use the site more, rather than as a metric of discerning who is the best blipper. Also, while blips are infinite (because they aren't based on putting $$$ into the system), they are also finite (you don't have unlimited blips to give others directly) and transferrable.
This began to remind me of Alfie Kohn's Punished by Rewards, which argued that rewarding students causes them to devalue learning itself and simply work for the reward. Extrinsic motivators diminish intrinsic motivators. I've read the book: the research cited is IIRC fairly convincing, although I'm not sure the theories can be implemented in a large scale in schools.
Yet, I don't think the system I was discussing in the last entry ([this is good]) really falls into the category, because it works more like comments, like a very short, pre-made kind of comment, or like a poll result.
Anyway, in other news, I see that DW is planning cross site authenticated RSS reading. The bug reports says: " you won't need to create a feed account for every account you want to follow. You'll
provide us with your authentication information for the LJ-based site you want
to read the friends page of, and we will take what the protocol returns,
perform magic, and intercut it on your DW reading page." I wonder how this would work... Well, maybe I wouldn't be able to understand it anyhow.
Is it the appearance of metrics? Yet, LJ also has metrics: comment count, and # of people friending you. I certainly use comments as a metric and believe getting them does measure my 'success' in some manner. Probably blips were created to be a game, to get people to use the site more, rather than as a metric of discerning who is the best blipper. Also, while blips are infinite (because they aren't based on putting $$$ into the system), they are also finite (you don't have unlimited blips to give others directly) and transferrable.
This began to remind me of Alfie Kohn's Punished by Rewards, which argued that rewarding students causes them to devalue learning itself and simply work for the reward. Extrinsic motivators diminish intrinsic motivators. I've read the book: the research cited is IIRC fairly convincing, although I'm not sure the theories can be implemented in a large scale in schools.
Yet, I don't think the system I was discussing in the last entry ([this is good]) really falls into the category, because it works more like comments, like a very short, pre-made kind of comment, or like a poll result.
Anyway, in other news, I see that DW is planning cross site authenticated RSS reading. The bug reports says: " you won't need to create a feed account for every account you want to follow. You'll
provide us with your authentication information for the LJ-based site you want
to read the friends page of, and we will take what the protocol returns,
perform magic, and intercut it on your DW reading page." I wonder how this would work... Well, maybe I wouldn't be able to understand it anyhow.
no subject
Date: 2009-04-13 11:37 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-04-13 11:59 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-04-14 01:16 am (UTC)I really think metrics are the way popularity is ranked online. The hard part is figuring out the metric rankings; are comments considered stronger than website hits? Do website hints trump links? And so forth. We can't use objective measures of value (like dollars) for most online "transactions" so I think the metrics are a useful substitute.
no subject
Date: 2009-04-14 01:27 am (UTC)Yeah.. .Well, I think the SEO people have developed some theories in that direction. XD Do you also study SEO and the google analytics stuff?
no subject
Date: 2009-04-14 01:55 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-04-14 01:59 am (UTC)I'm kind of confused though... so on this comm the slash pairing McKay/Sheppard is the only slash pairing allowed to be posted? Or the only one in which these trends were observed?
Hmm, maybe you should write a post on this and submit it to metafandom. I'm sure they'd be interested in it.
no subject
Date: 2009-04-14 02:15 am (UTC)The community was open to any and all pairings but M/S became so ubiquitous (likely through reputation and response levels) that on one challenge (the "Harlequin" challenge) about four or five months into the community that people asked on the challenge post if pairings other than M/S were allowed. The mods quickly assured people that, yes, other pairings were welcomed and encouraged, but you can tell how much that particular pairing had basically made the community by that point.
I just might! The paper is due in about two weeks, so I could summarize my findings after I'm done. Until then, my focus is writing the paper. ;)
no subject
Date: 2009-04-14 02:50 am (UTC)Well, I'm not entirely surprised that story type is influenced by what stories have been previously praised. XD What is this effect called in sociology? Is this kind of like the long-tail effect? (er, the opposite part, the forming of the large head)
Wow... indeed, that is pretty drastic. That makes me feel sorry for the other shippers though.
Good luck on the paper.
no subject
Date: 2009-04-14 03:34 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-04-14 03:35 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-04-14 03:42 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-04-14 03:56 am (UTC)I wonder how this might pan out in terms of other metrics (views, etc), or whether feedback itself is also affected by other feedback (its prescence)
no subject
Date: 2009-04-14 04:00 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-04-14 04:05 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-04-14 04:07 am (UTC)Another way people game the system is by giving props to each other. You only need two people (http://blip.fm/profile/sub_divided/blip/3834699) to do it - though there might be a limit? Dunno, never tried.
Someone claimed today, in a blip, that Blip.fm is going to reset all the props soon. Can't remember who or where though and of course it's impossible to search. OTOH you can see prop obsession first-hand here:
http://search.twitter.com/search?q=props+blip.fm
So the etiquette is to say thanks for props? (Oops.) Lots of people have an automatic prop back policy (http://blip.fm/profile/evablue/blip/7169752), as well, which makes other people more inclined to prop them.
You don't get medals for props, though - followers is more important. People try to game that too, by giving @shoutouts to random users from the blip stream, hoping to be followed:
http://blip.fm/profile/yamamiya
Some genuinely great blippers mixed up with all the gamers.
no subject
Date: 2009-04-14 04:15 am (UTC)What would even be the purpose of resetting all the 'symbolic exchanges'? I don't get it. So people are playing for the medals as well? This is pretty hilarious. XD
no subject
Date: 2009-04-14 04:00 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-04-14 05:57 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-04-14 03:57 pm (UTC)(To Charmian: I hope that wasn't your only one. ^^; Or that there is some way for me to give it back. Can I pay it forward?)
<3 <3 <3 <3
Twitter and blip.fm social dynamics are both hugely weird to me, since the system puts so many constraints on what you can do - but that only seems to make people more inclined to try. ^^ At the same time it's much easier to connect than on LJ, where you are forced to take chances on people you don't know well (yet). In a way it's almost more like RL than like the blogsphere.
no subject
Date: 2009-04-14 04:12 pm (UTC)Hm, the point about it resembling RL sort of reminds me of what Scalzi said about Twitter, which a friend linked me to a while ago.
no subject
Date: 2009-04-14 05:06 pm (UTC)And it's easy. LJ is less casual. Before you can friend someone on LJ, you have to go through the same awkward first steps you would if you were meeting someone in real life - hang out at parties (communities) and have conversations about mutual interests, or go over to a friend's (journal) and talk about your mutual acquaintances. The relationship may ultimately be deeper, but it's not as effortless.
no subject
Date: 2009-04-14 08:55 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-04-15 12:12 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-04-15 12:19 am (UTC)