Perception of e-mail as
a significant factor in information overload
Thomas Virgona
DIS899 (b)
Summer II 2002
Professor Amy Spaulding
Palmer School
of Library and Information Science
Table
of Contents
Abstract..................................................................................................................................................................... 3
Introduction............................................................................................................................................................ 4
Information Overload
and Information Studies.......................................................................... 7
Defining Information
Overload................................................................................................................. 9
Information Overload –
Self Help Solution(s)............................................................................. 12
Research.................................................................................................................................................................... 14
Discussion and Findings.................................................................................................................................. 16
Conclusions........................................................................................................................................................... 17
Appendix Section.................................................................................................................................................. 20
Appendix A – Electronic Mail Survey................................................................................................... 20
Appendix B – Frequency Distribution.................................................................................................... 23
Resources................................................................................................................................................................. 26
The phenomena
known as electronic mail is growing throughout all segments of society. The low expense and ease of use is enabling
students, working professionals and people separated geographically from one
another to easily communicate with one another. While growing and diffusing throughout the globe, a disturbing
trend is emerging. Despite the power of
the tool, users of this innovation sometimes feel overwhelmed by the volume of
messages that can be generated with electronic mail. As a result, many users are now reporting that electronic mail is
contributing to information overload.
Ironically, in
an attempt to stem the information overload problem, the developers of the tool
provide features to assist in managing the effects of vast messages that are
generated. In another conflicting piece
of data is that more and more people feel that electronic mail contributes to
information overload but users of the tool still consider it to be a valuable
mode of communications. One
psychological result is working professionals will mentally calculate the task
of addressing electronic mail while out of the office. The volume contributes to the concept of
exformation. Exformation refers to the
mental thought process conducted to create or respond to a message is reduced
greatly by the amount of pending messages.
The reduced time spent on each message increases exformation, or the
information excluded from the communication.
Pagers, Cell phones, Blackberry,
electronic mail (email), voice mail, videoconferences, etc. All are relatively new innovations over the
last twenty years design to improve and facilitate communications. Have these new communications devices
advanced personal and group communications or have they had a negative
impact. Stephen Roach of Morgan
Stanley Dean Witter believes we have entered into a trap, working 24/7 (Roach
2002). "Courtesy of laptops,
cellphones, home fax machines, and other appliances, knowledge workers are now
online in cars, planes, trains, and homes, virtually tethered to their offices. Technology will burnout human beings. The 24/7 culture of nearly round-the-clock
work is endemic to the wired economy. Acceleration of productivity growth
through hard work alone isn't sustainable: People simply can't work harder and
harder indefinitely. That's a lesson that should not be lost on America and its
brave new economy."
The impetus for this research stems from the anecdotal
stories of electronic mail users. Many
people of all works of life are now using eMail for interpersonal and
professional communications. The power
and convenience of this mode of communicating without boundaries is vast. The low expense, or in some cases no cost at
all, has removed the economic barriers of diffusion and adoption. Ease of use and low training time allows
users email to be up and running in a matter of minutes. The actual use of the tool has become the
larger issue, especially when used to communicate to people less than 50 feet
away (Losee 1989). The power to send to
multiple parties, discussion groups, add attachments, read and send at any time
of the day or night are desirables features.
The year 2002 shows a growing trend to wireless electronic mail, which
started approximately ten years ago.
Blackberry and Palm devices are becoming more prevalent and less
expensive. These wireless communication
devices come with interesting notification features, such as a vibrating
alert. Ironically, the vibrating alert
feature is used so people in close proximity are not bothered by the alert. However, the attention of receiver of the
message is distracted by the message and subsequently changes their focus to
the medium. Although not in disturbed
originally by the alert, the awareness of the receiver message is ultimately
distracted from others around them, probably causing a higher level of
annoyance.
At the root of this discussion is the term
communication. The Shannon-Weaver
Communication model contains six components of communication (Underwood 2002):
·
A source
·
An encoder
·
A message
·
A channel
·
A decoder
·
A receiver
Analysis of this model includes the criticism that the message can
be separated from the process. This is
in direct contrast to McLuhan's feeling that the medium is the message. The model does discuss semantic noise, which
is at the core of the information overload concept. Although difficult to define, semantic noise is at the very
essence of the study of human communication, concerning itself with people's
knowledge level, communication skills, experience, prejudices, etc. (Underwood
2002). Human beings process information based on life experiences,
education, medium, etc. Something that
is written makes it feel more permanent resulting in a little more anxiety than
in just talking. Phone conversations
are in real time, and one has other parts of the message than just the
words - tone, pauses, etc. In general, one can be spontaneous on the
phone, but find email uncomfortable (Spaulding 2002).
T.D. Wilson, Professor Emeritus in Information Management, University
of Sheffield discusses how information overload is not a new phenomenon. The potential for overload has existed ever
since information became an important input to any human activity (Wilson
2001). Wilson believes once the
scientific disciplines began to clearly emerge in the 17th to 19th centuries,
it gradually became impossible for anyone to keep abreast of all of the works
in a discipline. In some fields, the degree of specialization is so high, even
within the same discipline, people are unable to keep abreast of all sub-areas
and, in fact, may be completely unable to understand some of them. Common sense indicates the proportions are
vastly different. As Wurman writes, a
typical weekday edition of The New York Times contains more information than
the average person was likely to come across in a lifetime in seventeenth-century
England. (Nelson 2001)
More recently, the commercial information vendors have taken
an interest in the subject, since it is in their interests to ensure that the
information load on managers and executives is not so great as to preclude use
of their services.
With this growing information overload trend, what is the down side? Do users of this method of communication feel this is a benefit, or an intrusion on their life, allowing for limited separation between work and home? Should the discipline of Information Studies be concerned with this phenomenon? Is there a historical basis for the research? To resolve these questions, a historical retrospective is required.
Information science, in its broadest sense, stands for the systematic study of information and may include combinations of other academic disciplines (Machlup and Mansfield). Scholarly research relating specifically to information overload and its subsequent relationship to electronic mail can be traced back to the writings of Marshall McLuhan and Norbert Weiner. Their writings starting in the mid-1900’s to the late 1900’s show the growing convergence of technology and communication, and the resulting benefits and problems. While focusing on the impact to the field of Human Computer Interface, cultural and societies changes are discussed.
McLuhan’s view is dramatic in the sense that he believes electronic
modes of communications will reshape communication (Kostelanetz 1967). The overriding theme in McLuhan’s world is
that the “medium is the message".
McLuhan’s belief that contemporary man experiences numerous forces of
communication simultaneously, often through more than one of his senses. The result will be less content focus and
more skimming, similar in the way newspapers are read. “In his over-all view of human history,
McLuhan believes in four great stages: (1) Totally oral, preliterate tribalism.
(2) The codification by script that arose after Home in ancient Greece and
lasted 2,000 years. (3) The age of print, roughly from 1500 to 1900. (4) The
age of electronic media, from before 1900 to the present. Underpinning this
classification is his thesis that "societies have been shaped more by the
nature of the media by which men communicate than by the content of the
communication." (Kostelanetz 1967).
One can sense McLuhan’s fear of whether this new technology is a benefit
to society in general.
Fifty years ago, Norbert Weiner proposed that a society could be understood through a study of the messages and the communication channels that belong to culture (Boyer 2002). “He saw a world that focused on information, not energy; and on digital or numeric processes, not machine or analog. His theories not only laid the foundation for this new field of study, they also largely predicted the future development of computers.” (Jones 2002)
While not a radical new phenomenon, scholars have predicted
with some precision and accuracy the merger of technology and communication and
the resulting societal impact. Concerns
have now grown past the workplace and into society in general, being held
hostage by an inundation of information, which threatens to exceed our ability
to manage it (Nelson 2001). Information overload costs businesses and individuals
valuable time, effort and additional resources... and the cost is rising.
In a related information science field, information literacy
is concerned with information access.
Horton, in the 1983 article “Information literacy vs. computer literacy”
in the Bulletin of the American Society for Information Science, joins the
literacy and overload debates (Nelson 2001).
Information literacy can be defined by the “people'' aspect of
information access, raising the levels of awareness of the knowledge explosion
and involving understanding as to how technology can help identify, access, and
obtain data and documents needed for problem solving and decision making. The inability to merge knowledge and
information studies limits both disciplines and is unreasonable (Machlup and
Mansfied).
To determine if information overload is truly a growing
concern, one must define the basic term: Information Overload.
No one definition of Information
Overload is sufficient to cover the multitudes of interpretations and
individual preferences. However, a
working research definition is required.
Several individuals have attempted to define the term and the result is a
common set of terminology.
From academia, at the University of St. Gallen, Martin
Eppler poses the definition: “Information Overload is a state where the
individual is no longer able to effectively process the amount of information
he or she is exposed to. The result is
a lower decision quality in a given time set.” Other academia may have a different perspective on information
overload. According to John Naisbitt,
some scientists claim it takes less time to do an experiment than to find out
whether or not it has been done before. (Nelson 2001)
A slightly more business and economic definition comes from
various sources. For example, Losee
defines information overload as the economic loss associated with the
examination of a number of non- or less-relevant messages, as in related
information retrieval models (Losee 1989).
Another perspective relates to the cognitive definition of information overload. Information overload is the inability to extract needed knowledge from an immense quantity of information for one of many reasons. Wurman explains that information overload can occur when a person (Nelson 2001):
·
Does not understand
available information.
·
Feels overwhelmed by
the amount of information to be understood.
·
Does not know if
certain information exists.
·
Does not know where
to find information.
·
Knows where to find
information, but does not have the key to access it.
On the internet, arguably the
largest source of information overload, one writer (Anonymous 2002) delineates
how specific types of electronic email contribute to information overload.
Time wasting
- it’s easy to waste time reading and sending e-mail (just as it is easy to
waste time surfing the web). You feel that you have been busy and you have been
doing something useful when in fact you haven’t accomplished anything. This is
not to say that e-mail isn’t useful. It can be real work that you are doing,
e.g. organizing a conference, and discussing a research proposal.
Junk - is also
known as unsolicited commercial e-mail and spam. It can be adverts for making
money fast, slimming treatments, free holidays. They aren’t paying to send it
but you might be paying to receive it.
Attachments
- some people won’t open attachments incase they contain a virus. It is bad
enough passing on a virus to an individual. If you send an attachment with a
virus to a list, you upset many more people. They should be used with care:
check that the other party is happy to receive them.
Flames - debate on a
list can degenerate into name calling with angry messages fly backwards and
forwards
Chat - lists can
be used more for social than scholarly purposes.
Confusion
- it can be more difficult to convey nuances of meaning when you don’t have the
aid of gestures and repetition. Discussions can move on rapidly on a list.
Repetition
- you find on lists that the same questions are asked over and over again.
For the purposes of this research, the Eppler definition
will be used for its inclusion of the cognitive impact of the problem.
That is not to say the information overload problem has gone undetected. The same tools that present the problem actually offer some simple solutions to manage the chaos. These tools utilize artificial intelligence to learn behavior and preferences of a particular user. Farithorne argues that computers are not capable of this task and require tedious instructions. To combat these obstacles, many companies have attempted to address the problem.
ZD Net, a technology publisher, has provided some mailbox
management suggestions to reduce stress and optimize the use of electronic
mail. (Berst 2000):
Automate tasks:
If you always include contact information when you sign your emails, create a
signature. If you always forward mail from certain senders to someone else,
automate the procedure. If you haven't created work group aliases, set them up.
Preview messages:
How many messages do you really need to open? Sometimes I can glance at the
subject line to know I can hit delete. Other times I need a little more info.
The preview pane integrated in Outlook 2000 allows me to quickly scan an email
without opening it, and scroll by pressing my spacebar. Click for more.
Discipline yourself:
Efficiency experts recommend dealing with a piece of paper only once. That's
good advice for managing email, too. Once a message arrives, read it and act on
it. Delete it. Respond to it. File it. Click for more.
Don't duplicate:
Announce your preferred means of communication. How many times has someone
emailed and faxed you identical information -- and then phoned to see if you
received it? That kind of duplication is a time sink -- for everyone involved.
Stay safe:
Email viruses can create one of the biggest time sinks you'll come across. And
we've had way too many of them in recent months. Be vigilant, even skeptical
when you receive mail from someone you don't know. Make sure your anti-virus
software is up to date.
Sophisticated electronic mail managers have entered the marketplace with limited success. The design of these tools is dependent on artificial intelligence, which learns by experience. These tools performs electronic email tasks, such as prioritize, delete, forward, sort and archive mail messages on behalf of the user. Problems with the early adoption of this technology include (Maes 2002)
·
The first problem is
that of competence: how does an agent acquire the knowledge it needs to decide
when to help the user, what to help the user with, and how to help the user?
·
The second problem is
that of trust: how can we guarantee that the user feels comfortable delegating
tasks to an agent?
As computers are used for more tasks and become integrated
with more services, users will need help dealing with the information and work
overload. Interface agents change the style of human-computer interaction. The
user delegates a range of tasks to personalized agents that can act on the
user's behalf. The artificial intelligence, the agent gradually learns how to
better assist the user.
In an effort to determine if
electronic mail is seen as a contributing factor of information overload, a
survey was conducted. The survey was distributed to commuters on the Long Island
Rail Road in New York. The target
audience was working professionals commuting between Long Island and New York
City. This audience is working
professionals largely dependent on information for their livelihood.
The surveys were distributed on the westbound morning trains and eastbound evening trains. One of the assumptions was the pool of possible respondents was broad based, covering a large array of educational, ethnic and professional areas. The results of the surveys indicates the sample population this was more narrowly focused than anticipated.
Sixty Six percent of respondents were Caucasian, 81% held a Bachelors/Master’s degree, 72% worked in the corporate world and 60% have one-to-three children. Given the fact that the Long Island Rail Road is the largest commuter railroad in the country, a larger crosscut of society was expected.
The questions were formulated to determine if information overload was a growing problem. Despite the diversity of definitions for information overload, not one respondent asked for a clarification of the term. All people surveyed not only willingly took the survey, but enjoyed talking about the topic. Upon reflection on the construction of the survey questions, a question asking how many emails per day each respondent received would have been beneficial to the research.
In addition to the information overload question, several related questions were posed. Do people delete electronic mail without reading the message? This opens up the topic of entropy. Entropy is a measure of an amount of information we have no interest in knowing (Norretranders 1998).
Also of interest was the cognitive impact of electronic mail. Has this innovation become so pervasive that
users of this tool find it burdensome? Exformation is about the mental work we do in order to make
what we say understood by the receiver of the message. Exformation is the discarded information,
everything we do not actually say but have in our heads when or before we
communicate anything at all (Norretranders 1998). With the increasing volume of
messaging, can effective communication continue or is exformation growing and
information decreasing? “Norretranders discusses exformation in terms of
editing one’s idea in light of context known to be shared between writer and reader. His example of Hugo’s question mark is great, because its brevity makes the point in a
startling way. Clearly both publisher
and author knew he referred to Les Miserables (Spaulding 2002).”
The results of the surveys were entered into a Winks database for analysis. The Winks software product provides statistical reporting functions. The data is stored in a database and can easily be exported to other tools for further analysis.
After reviewing the findings of the survey, several conflicting patterns emerge. The results of the surveys indicate electronic mail is contributing to information overload. Sixty-four percent of respondents indicate that email contributes to information overload. However, 100% of those surveyed believe email is a valuable mode of communications. The paradox is that people feel somewhat overwhelmed by electronic mail, but still feel it is valuable too to communicate.
One of the more interesting findings came from the question asking how many electronic mails do you delete on a daily basis without reading. There was a significant range in responses, from 0 to 500. A follow up conversation with the respondent who deletes 500 emails per day stated the source of many of the 500 deleted messages was a network server monitoring tool designed to provide information on possible hardware problems. The tools purpose was to inform critical resources of potential system problems. However, due to the sensitivity of the monitoring tool, the tool generates such a large volume of messages, it defeats its primary function. The message gets lost in the medium. A more representative metric to the question is 24% of the people surveyed delete 10 emails a day without reading the message.
“One of the keywords in cognitive science is representation (Machlup and Mansfield).” An increasing number of messages are now being represented in electronic mail format. As a result, electronic mail does have a growing relationship in the cognitive disciplines. Forty-five percent of those surveyed like the idea of no electronic mail day. Fifty-seven percent of the respondents access their professional electronic mails from home. This would indicate a desire to escape from electronic mail communications. Despite the physical separation from work and home, the lines are becoming blurred due to technological advances, which easily allows access to corporate communication systems.
Using Roger’s theory of diffusion, one could argue all of
the respondents of this survey are early adopters of electronic mail. Despite deep market penetration in
cosmopolitan areas, the vast majority of the populace does not use electronic
mail. For this reason, a longitudinal
study is appropriate in this situation.
Over time and as electronic mail becomes more pervasive in society it
would be interesting to see if people’s perception that electronic mail contributes
to information overload.
Cognitive research could center on apprehension created by
electronic mail. The research conducted
indicates almost half of the respondents mentally calculate the number of
electronic mail messages they will receive when they are out of the
workplace. In areas where electronic
mail is becoming the primary communication mode, replacing phone and meetings,
the advantages of the medium may become outweighed by the disadvantages.
Massive volumes of these messages may also contribute
to the phenomena known as exformation.
Pressure to address the large number of messages will cause a decrease
in the time a response can be formulated, not allowing for full attention to
the message and meaning. As a result,
the mental process to expedite the process will cause the information to be
excluded from the message, therefore increasing exformation. As we fragment knowledge and lose a sense of
wisdom, what happens to us psychologically as individuals and as a group
(Spaulding 2002)?”
Regardless of the drawbacks of electronic mail, it is a tool
society is quickly adopting into many cultures. The ability to communicate globally without the usual
restrictions of time and space has made this tool very popular. The use of the tool has become so prevalent
that a backlash has occurred where professionals focus on the medium, not the
message.
|
Passengers on the Long
Island Rail Rod (LIRR), Respondents were Westbound morning commuters or
Eastbound evening commuters. |
|
|
Sample Frame |
Any
adult. |
|
Sample |
Respondents
to ad hoc requests. Approximately 90
respondents is the survey goal. |
|
Method |
Self-Administered
Questionnaire. Surveys will be
confidential and anonymous. Surveys will
be administered on the railroad. |
|
Motivation |
Is the
use of electronic mail contributing to Information overload? |
|
Feasibility |
This
research team believes that a survey of this nature is feasible. Cost will be relatively low. The response rate is estimated to be 100%. |
|
Definition of Key Terms |
Adult: Any one over aged 18. |
|
Assumption |
Adult
has familiarity or experience with the electronic mail. |
|
Importance |
This
issue has an impact on how members of society communicate with one another. |
Research Question
|
Does
the proliferation of electronic mail contribute to information overload? |
Independent Variables
|
If an
adult is a user of electronic mail? |
Dependent Variables
|
The
volume of electronic does or does not contribute to information overload. |
Null Hypothesis
|
Electronic
mail does not contribute to information overload. |
|
|
|
Questionnaire # ______
|
All
responses are anonymous and will be kept confidential. |
|
|
Question |
|
Response |
|
|
|
|
|
|
1. |
Does the electronic mail
contribute to information overload? |
|
Yes No |
|
2. |
Do you access your professional electronic mails from
home? |
|
Yes No Not applicable |
|
3. |
# of e-mail accounts? |
|
Enter actual #: |
|
4. |
Do
you like the idea of a 'No electronic mail day'? |
|
Yes No |
|
5. |
#
of electronic mails you deleted without reading per day? |
|
Enter
actual #: |
|
6. |
Do you view the task of reading electronic mail as a: |
|
Ø
Chore Ø Benefit |
|
7. |
Do
you mentally calculate the number of electronic mail you will receive when
you are not in the workplace? |
|
Yes No Not applicable |
|
8. |
Electronic mail is valuable mode of
communications: |
|
Ø Strongly Agree Ø Agree Ø Neither Agree or
Disagree Ø Disagree Ø Strongly Disagree |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The
questions asked below will allow data analysis by categories. |
|
(Circle your answer) |
|
9. |
Your gender. |
|
Female Male |
|
10. |
Your
age group. |
|
Ø
(18
– 35) Ø
(36
– 45) Ø
(46
– 55) Ø
(Over
55) |
|
11. |
Area of professional work: |
|
Ø
Government Ø
Education Ø Corporate Ø Other |
|
12. |
Number
of children or dependents? |
|
Ø
(0) Ø
(1-3) Ø
(4-6) Ø
(Over
6) |
|
13. |
Ethnicity. |
|
Ø African American Ø
Asian Ø
Caucasian Ø
Hispanic Ø
Other
(Please specify) ________________ |
|
14. |
Your highest level of education? |
|
Ø High school Ø Bachelor Degree Ø Masters Degree Ø Doctorate Ø Other (Please specify)
________________ |
Frequency Table for Q1: Does the
electronic mail contribute to information overload?
Cumulative Cumulative
No 12 36.36 12 36.36
Yes 21 63.64 33 100.0
Frequency Table for Q2: Do you access your professional electronic mails from home? Cumulative Cumulative
Q2_ACCESS Frequency Percent Frequency Percent
No 14 42.42 14 42.42
Yes 19 57.58 33 100.0
Frequency Table for Q3: # of e-mail accounts?
Cumulative Cumulative
0 1
3.03 1
3.03
1 8 24.24 9 27.27
2 15 45.45 24 72.73
3 4 12.12 28 84.85
4 3 9.09 31 93.94
5 1 3.03 32 96.97
7 1 3.03 33 100.0
Frequency Table for Q4: Do you like the idea of a 'No electronic mail day'? Cumulative Cumulative
Q4_NO_EMAI Frequency Percent Frequency Percent
1
3.03 1 3.03
N 17 51.52 18 4.55
Y 15 45.45 33 100.0
Frequency Table for Q5: #
of electronic mails you deleted without reading per day?
Q5_NOREADD Frequency Percent Frequency Percent
0 7
21.21 7 21.21
1
1 3.03 8 24.24
4 1 3.03 9 27.27
6 1 3.03 10 30.3
10 8 24.24 18 54.55
15 2 6.06 20 60.61
20 3 9.09 23 69.7
25 1 3.03 24 72.73
30 3 9.09 27 81.82
60 1 3.03 28 84.85
100 2 6.06 30 90.91
125 1 3.03 31 93.94
200 1 3.03 32 96.97
500 1 3.03 33 100.0
Frequency Table for Q6: Do you view the task of reading electronic mail as a: Cumulative Cumulative
Q6_CHORE Frequency Percent
Frequency Percent
3
9.09 3 9.09
Benefit 17 51.52 20 60.61
Chore 13 39.39 33 100.0
Frequency Table for Q7: Do you mentally calculate the number of electronic mail you will receive
when you are not in the workplace?
Cumulative Cumulative
Q7_MENTAL Frequency Percent Frequency Percent
No 17 51.52 17 51.52
Yes 16 48.48 33
100.0
Frequency Table for Q8: Electronic mail is valuable mode of communications:
Strongly
Agree 17 51.52 17 51.52
Frequency Table for Q9: Gender
Cumulative Cumulative
Q9_GENDER Frequency Percent Frequency Percent
F 10 30.3 10 30.3
M 23 69.7 33 100.0
Cumulative Cumulative
Q10_AGE Frequency Percent Frequency Percent
18-35 12 36.36 12 36.36
36-45 14 42.42 26 78.79
46-55 5 5.15 31 93.94
Over 55 2 6.06 33 100.0
Frequency Table for Q11: Area of
professional work Cumulative Cumulative
Q11_PROFES Frequency Percent Frequency Percent
Other 4 12.12 4 12.12
Government 2 6.06 6 18.18
Education 3 9.09 9 27.27
Corporate 24 72.73 33 100.0
Cumulative Cumulative
Q12_DEPEND Frequency Percent Frequency Percent
No Response 3 9.09 3 9.09
0 8 24.24 11 33.33
1-3 22 66.67 33 100.0
Q13_ETHNIC Frequency Percent Frequency Percent
African American 2 6.06 2 6.06
Asian 6 18.18 8 24.24
Caucasian 22 66.67 30 90.91
Hispanic 1 3.03 31 93.94
Other 2 6.06 33 100.0
Cumulative Cumulative
Q14_EDUCAT Frequency Percent Frequency Percent
High school 4 12.12 4 12.12
Bachelor Degree 14 42.42 18 54.55
Masters Degree 13 39.39 31 93.94
Doctorate 1 3.03 32 96.97
Other
1 3.03 3 100.0
Anonymous. http://www.mailbase.ac.uk/docs/overload/tsld002.htm. What causes Information overload? Last site
visit 05/19/2002.
Boyer, Ernest L. Conference on
Intellectual Property Rights and the Arts: The Impact of New
Technologies”. http://mitpress2.mit.edu/e-journals/Leonardo/isast/spec.projects/boyer.html.
Last visit: 05/18/2002.
Berst, Jesse. “End Inbox Blues: Common-Sense Ways to Control Electronic mail
Overload. July 5th, 2000. http://www.zdnet.com/anchordesk/stories/story/0,10738,2597972,00.html.
Last visit: 05/21/2002.
Eppler, Martin. Definition Information Overload (1999). http://www.knowledgemedia.org/netacademy/glossary.nsf/kw_id_all/845. Last visit: 05/18/2002.
Jones International. Norbert Wiener
(1894 - 1964). http://www.digitalcentury.com/encyclo/update/wiener.html.
Last visit: 05/18/2002.
Maes, Pattie. Agents that Reduce Work
and Information Overload. http://agents.www.media.mit.edu/people/pattie/CACM-94/CACM-94.p1.html. Last
visit: 05/03/2002.
Nelson, Mark R. We Have the Information You Want, But
Getting It Will Cost You: Being Held Hostage by Information Overload. http://www.acm.org/crossroads/xrds1-1/mnelson.html.
Last visit: 05/03/2002.
Kirsh, David. A Few Thoughts on
Cognitive Overload. http://icl-server.ucsd.edu/~kirsh/Articles/Overload/published.html.
Last visit: 05/03/2002.
Kostelanetz, Richard. Understanding
McLuhan (In Part) January 29, 1967. http://www.nytimes.com/books/97/11/02/home/mcluhan-magazine.html.
(Last site review: 05/19/2002).
Lashkari, Y., Metral, M. and Maes, P.
Collaborative Interface Agents. In: Proceedings of the National Conference on
Artificial Intelligence, 1994.
Losee, Robert M.. “Information overload, internet filtering
agents, e-mail filtering, information filtering, user modeling, routing,
ranking electronic mail Minimizing Information Overload: the Ranking of
Electronic Messages.” Journal of
Information Science, 15, 1989, p. 179-189.
Machlup, Fritz., Mansfield, Una. “The
Study of Information: Interdisciplinary Messages.” John Wiley and Sons. New
York. Date unkown.
Maes, Pattie. Agents that Reduce Work
and Information Overload. http://agents.www.media.mit.edu/people/pattie/CACM-94/CACM-94.p1.html. Last visit: 05/03/2002.
Naisbitt, John. Megatrends. New York:
Warner Books. 1982. (This book is out of print, but you might be interested in
a newer version: Megatrends 2000 by the same author.)
Nelson, Mark R. We Have the Information You Want, But
Getting It Will Cost You: Being Held Hostage by Information Overload. January
12th, 2001. http://www.acm.org/crossroads/xrds1-1/mnelson.html. Last visit:
05/03/2002.
Norretranders, Tor. The User Illusion: Cutting Consciousness
Down to Size. Penguin Books. New York. 1998.
Roach, Stephen. “Technology traps us
into working 24/7.Listen to Stephen Roach of Morgan Stanley Dean Witter.” http://www.softpanorama.org/Social/overload.shtml.
Last visit: 05/22/2002.
Spaulding, Amy, Interview by Thomas Virgona, phone,
June 24th, 2002.
Underwood, Mick. “The Shannon-Weaver Model”. http://www.cultsock.ndirect.co.uk/MUHome/cshtml/index.html.
Last visit: 05/22/2002.
Wilson T.D. Information Overload
(06/01/01). http://informationr.net/tdw/publ/ppt/overload/. Last
visit of website 05/20/2002.