Re-interpretation of information overload/underuse

Review of Frameworks for the Representation of alternative Conceptual Orderings as Determined by Linguistic and Cultural Contexts (Part #23)

[Parts: First | Prev | Next | Last | All] [Links: To-K | From-K | From-Kx | Refs ]

The argument of the previous sections suggests the need to reinterpret the significance attached to information 'overload' and 'underuse'. For whilst there may be a large amount of information circulating, if such information were to be tagged by the implicit 'language' (in the broad sense of the term used here), it would become clearer as to why many non-users of that language were avoiding use of information presented in that language. Such information would be perceived as presented in an unmeaningful manner and might be subject to strong criticism totally insensitive to the fact that the information is in effect presented in a different language which others find useful. 

Where there is an excessive amount of information available in the same language, the overload problem needs to be seen in the light of the need for a more selective language to filter out the information which does not contribute to insights at a new level of significance. 

Means need to be found to make distinctions between different forms of openness and closure to information. On this question the presentation of Orrin E Klapp 'Opening and Closing' is extremely helpful (54). He argues that it is normal for individuals and societies to alternate between openness and closure to information. This alternation constitutes a strategy of living systems against entropy. The merit of his approach is that he distinguishes between four categories or sectors: bad opening (e.g. information overload) and good opening (e.g. innovation), as well as bad opening (e.g. information overload) and bad closing (e.g. meaningless and banality). He summarizes the situation in the following figure. 'Stresses such as information overload and loss of trust come from straying too far and too often into losing sectors... Strategy requires sensitive alternation of opening and closing according to advantages perceived. Therefore, openness or closedness is not a fixedstructural feature of a system but a changing life strategy of organisness and groups' (54, p. ix). 

Klapp sees the challenge of modernization as being one of distinguising more clearly between good opening and bad opening 'Information unbalance, then, is being too long in a losing position in this game, especially in a lower sector of the field... Coping requires continual maneuvering, depending on feedback, one's own state (fatigue, etc), and one's position on the field. Inundated by noise and bad vibrations, one turns toward good closing. Stifled by the banality of a plastic world, one may seek good opening' (54, pp. 158-9). As he stresses, shifting between such different conditions is an appropriate method of responding to the dynamic information environment. This corresponds to the need for 'resonance' as discussed above. 

[Parts: First | Prev | Next | Last | All] [Links: To-K | From-K | From-Kx | Refs ]