击穿偏压

Q2 Social Sciences Journal of Information Literacy Pub Date : 2022-12-02 DOI:10.11645/16.2.3100
J. Burkholder, Kat Phillips
{"title":"击穿偏压","authors":"J. Burkholder, Kat Phillips","doi":"10.11645/16.2.3100","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n \n \nWhat is bias? A review of the library literature reveals no attempts to define the concept. Nor does it reveal systematic attempts to develop interventions that teach the identification and evaluation of bias. Current pedagogical approaches (checklists and bias charts) tend to assume a self-evident definition that categorises bias as unquestioningly bad and disqualifying. Current approaches, however, fail to recognise the cognitive complexity of decoding bias within a source. A decoding process includes identifying the type of bias, determining an objective baseline, recognising biased features, and analysing bias’s impact. Based on work done from several fields—argumentation theory, media bias, media literacy, and history education—this paper proposes an operational definition of bias and a practical framework for conceptualising a process to identify and evaluate bias. This paper will explore the limitations of this framework, as well as existing source evaluation paradigms. If librarians want to prepare individuals to participate in a post-truth society, where disinformation weaponises bias by appealing to emotions and beliefs rather than facts, an inclusive and nuanced conception of bias is a necessary component of library instruction. \n \n \n","PeriodicalId":38111,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Information Literacy","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-12-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Breaking down bias\",\"authors\":\"J. Burkholder, Kat Phillips\",\"doi\":\"10.11645/16.2.3100\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"\\n \\n \\nWhat is bias? A review of the library literature reveals no attempts to define the concept. Nor does it reveal systematic attempts to develop interventions that teach the identification and evaluation of bias. Current pedagogical approaches (checklists and bias charts) tend to assume a self-evident definition that categorises bias as unquestioningly bad and disqualifying. Current approaches, however, fail to recognise the cognitive complexity of decoding bias within a source. A decoding process includes identifying the type of bias, determining an objective baseline, recognising biased features, and analysing bias’s impact. Based on work done from several fields—argumentation theory, media bias, media literacy, and history education—this paper proposes an operational definition of bias and a practical framework for conceptualising a process to identify and evaluate bias. This paper will explore the limitations of this framework, as well as existing source evaluation paradigms. If librarians want to prepare individuals to participate in a post-truth society, where disinformation weaponises bias by appealing to emotions and beliefs rather than facts, an inclusive and nuanced conception of bias is a necessary component of library instruction. \\n \\n \\n\",\"PeriodicalId\":38111,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Information Literacy\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-12-02\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Information Literacy\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.11645/16.2.3100\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"Social Sciences\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Information Literacy","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.11645/16.2.3100","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Social Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

什么是偏见?对图书馆文献的回顾显示,没有尝试定义这个概念。它也没有揭示出有系统地尝试开发干预措施,教人们识别和评估偏见。目前的教学方法(检查表和偏见图表)倾向于假设一个不言而喻的定义,将偏见归类为毫无疑问的坏和不合格。然而,目前的方法未能认识到源内解码偏差的认知复杂性。解码过程包括识别偏见类型、确定客观基线、识别偏见特征和分析偏见的影响。基于论证理论、媒体偏见、媒体素养和历史教育等多个领域的工作,本文提出了偏见的操作定义和一个概念化识别和评估偏见过程的实用框架。本文将探讨该框架的局限性,以及现有的资源评估范式。如果图书馆员想让个人准备好参与后真相社会,在这个社会中,虚假信息通过诉诸情感和信念而不是事实来将偏见武器化,那么包容和细致的偏见概念是图书馆教学的必要组成部分。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Breaking down bias
What is bias? A review of the library literature reveals no attempts to define the concept. Nor does it reveal systematic attempts to develop interventions that teach the identification and evaluation of bias. Current pedagogical approaches (checklists and bias charts) tend to assume a self-evident definition that categorises bias as unquestioningly bad and disqualifying. Current approaches, however, fail to recognise the cognitive complexity of decoding bias within a source. A decoding process includes identifying the type of bias, determining an objective baseline, recognising biased features, and analysing bias’s impact. Based on work done from several fields—argumentation theory, media bias, media literacy, and history education—this paper proposes an operational definition of bias and a practical framework for conceptualising a process to identify and evaluate bias. This paper will explore the limitations of this framework, as well as existing source evaluation paradigms. If librarians want to prepare individuals to participate in a post-truth society, where disinformation weaponises bias by appealing to emotions and beliefs rather than facts, an inclusive and nuanced conception of bias is a necessary component of library instruction.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of Information Literacy
Journal of Information Literacy Social Sciences-Library and Information Sciences
CiteScore
1.40
自引率
0.00%
发文量
18
审稿时长
24 weeks
期刊介绍: JIL is an international, peer-reviewed journal that aims to investigate information literacy in all its forms to address the interests of diverse IL communities of practice. To this end it publishes articles from both established and new authors in this field. JIL welcomes contributions that push the boundaries of IL beyond the educational setting and examine this phenomenon as a continuum between those involved in its development and delivery and those benefiting from its provision. This journal provides immediate open access to its content on the principle that making research freely available to the public supports a greater global exchange of knowledge. The journal is published under the Gold Open Access model, because the CILIP Information Literacy Group believes that knowledge should be shared. It is therefore free and requires no subscription. In addition authors are not required to pay a fee to be published in JIL. The Journal of Information Literacy is published twice a year. Additional, special themed issues are also possible and the editor welcomes suggestions. JIL has an acceptance rate of 44% for articles submitted to the journal.
期刊最新文献
Moving beyond anxiety Building a bridge between skills and thresholds Fostering self-reflection on library instruction Information literacy now Information literacy after the AI revolution
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1