Influencing Objectivity and Subjectivity Through Award Program Criteria

Introduction.When we write an award criteria objectively, it is in
Cultural practices, cognitive behavior, peer groups,terms of an actual object of this world. One which
learned behavior and individual preferences have awe perceive with cognitive actions like walking,
profound effect upon web site creations and awardgrasping, rotation's or from afar with stability with
criteria-objectivity or subjectivity.respect to action, but in these instances with an
In addition what our visitors want and can give andaward seeker, the observation at different times
what we wish to give and want are not necessarilytaking into account cognitive behavior, the more we
equal, because each group makes decisions andknow the more we will discover and with discovery
applications which consider a representation, in termscomes constancy.
of textural descriptions or graphics, of web content.Cognitive Style
ObjectivityRiding and Rayner (1998) contend that as individuals,
Plato considered knowledge concerned with universalwe organize and present information according to our
truths. To him personal opinions were simplyunderstanding of information processed and filter this
irrelevant, since they belong in the area of changeinformation which transforms it to our own culture,
and were not fixed eternal. From Plato we gained thepeer groups and those whom we hold in esteem. We
core of modern ideology of science.refer to this as cultural cognition theory (CCT). CCT
A feature of academic writing is emphasis on theis important in web and award development because
information which the writer can give. Thoughts andwe can observe the total design which includes
beliefs are based upon what has been studied,graphics, text, music and informational architecture
learned and how this has enabled various conclusions,and form a strategy not to penalize differences from
which would lead a reader to assume that any ideathat of our own cultures. Such a strategy recognizes
not referenced is that of the author.that cultural building blocks are well formed by young
When objectivity as a concept originally evolved, itadulthood and will take a considerable time to
did not mean that those who write an award criteriareconfigure, if at all.
or create a website were free from bias, rather theMeasuring user understanding (an award criteria) by
mission was to consistently test information in adifferent cultures (in a broad sense this applies to
transparent approach, so that personal and culturalregions even within the United States, educational
bias would not undermine the award program. Then abackground and so forth) involves operators which
thought to give a criteria from the most important toare known to affect cognitive processes, such as
the least important, which would help an awardshort-term and long-term memory and local and past
seeker understand an unbiased and uniform approachcultural experiences.
to award giving.Definition: The Modern technical definition of culture,
In the original concept the method was objective,as socially patterned human thought and behavior,
not the award criteria creator. The key was in thewas originally proposed by the nineteenth-century
discipline, not the criteria itself. One implication is thatBritish anthropologist, Edward Tylor. This definition is
of an impartial writer who created a criteria from aan open-ended list, which has been extended
neutral viewpoint, would transform from seekingconsiderably since Tylor first proposed it. Some
awards themselves, to innovation in observing,researchers have attempted to create exhaustive
understanding or evaluation of those who seekuniversal lists of the content of culture, usually as
awards.guides for further research.
At present older conventions or understanding haveCitations
not been expanded to match the new forms ofChoong and Salvendy, 1999
Internet publications and methodology and has doneChang and White, 1992
less to develop award criteria to accept diverseFarnen, 1993
cultures or encompass ideology beyond that held byNisbett and Norenzayan, 2002
the award creator.Principia Cybernetica, 1997
Cognitive Actions or FeaturesE. Br. Goldstein, Cognitive Psychology, Wadsworth,
In 1919, Walter Lippmann and Charles Merz wrote the2004
following account of reporting on the RussianProject for Excellence in Journalism
Revolution. "In the large, the news about Russia is aPopper, Karl R. Objective Knowledge: An evolutionary
case of seeing not what was, but what men wishedApproach, Oxford Press, 1972
to see." In their opinion, the news writers did notAllen Megill, Rethinking Objectivity, London: Duke UP,
factor out certain cognitive actions which would have1994
resulted in an objective writing about the RussianDisclaimer: The citations, white paper and comments
Revolution.are neither a repudiation nor a criticism of current
Once information is received by the sensory organs,practices by anyone and is intended solely as factual
it is encoded and sent to the brain, like parsing ainformation for all to consider if and when an author
world into objects, making inferences, havingbegins to revisit their own AP criteria, which is a
associative memory and so forth. Once in the brainprocess promising to give longevity and credibility to
an action is initiated, which in some instances bearswhat we are attempting through our individual
no resemblance to objectivity.efforts. Enjoy!