59 Matching Annotations
  1. Nov 2022
  2. 6291320.fs1.hubspotusercontent-na1.net 6291320.fs1.hubspotusercontent-na1.net
    1. Edgar Allan Poe, who wrote in 1844, “In the marginalia, too, we talkonly to ourselves; we therefore talk freshly — boldly — originally — with abandonnement— without conceit.”1

      Poe, E. A. (1844). Marginalia. United States Magazine and Democratic Review, 15, 484, https://www.eapoe.org/works/misc/mar1144.htm

      Curious that Poe framed marginalia as a self-conversation rather than a conversation with the text itself...

    1. Goal SettingGoal setting was used by physiotherapists to activate and motivate patients, to determine what meaningful therapy would be for the patient and to set discharge limits (Leach, Cornwell, Fleming, and Haines, 2010Leach E, Cornwell P, Fleming J, Haines T 2010 Patient centered goal-setting in a subacute rehabilitation setting Disability and Rehabilitation 32: 159–172. [Taylor & Francis Online], [Web of Science ®], [Google Scholar]; Pashley et al, 2010Pashley E, Powers A, McNamee N, Buivids R, Piccinin J, Gibson BE 2010 Discharge from outpatient orthopaedic physiotherapy: A qualitative descriptive study of physiotherapists’ practices Physiotherapy Canada 62: 224–234. [Crossref], [PubMed], [Web of Science ®], [Google Scholar]; Rindflesch, 2009Rindflesch AB 2009 A grounded-theory investigation of patient education in physical therapy practice Physiotherapy Theory and Practice 25: 193–202. [Taylor & Francis Online], [Google Scholar]; Thomson, 2008Thomson D 2008 An ethnographic study of physiotherapists’ perceptions of their interactions with patients on a chronic pain unit Physiotherapy Theory and Practice 24: 408–422. [Taylor & Francis Online], [Google Scholar]). Goal setting seemed particular of physiotherapists’ interest, as patients did not spontaneously mention goal setting as important for patient-centered physiotherapy. Patient-centered physiotherapists, however, tried to allow the patients to define their own goals in collaboration (Larsson, Liljedahl, and Gard, 2010Larsson I, Liljedahl K, Gard G 2010 Physiotherapists’ experience of client participation in physiotherapy interventions: A phenomenographic study Advances in Physiotherapy 12: 217–223. [Taylor & Francis Online], [Google Scholar]; Pashley et al, 2010Pashley E, Powers A, McNamee N, Buivids R, Piccinin J, Gibson BE 2010 Discharge from outpatient orthopaedic physiotherapy: A qualitative descriptive study of physiotherapists’ practices Physiotherapy Canada 62: 224–234. [Crossref], [PubMed], [Web of Science ®], [Google Scholar]; Thomson, 2008Thomson D 2008 An ethnographic study of physiotherapists’ perceptions of their interactions with patients on a chronic pain unit Physiotherapy Theory and Practice 24: 408–422. [Taylor & Francis Online], [Google Scholar]; Trede, 2000Trede FV 2000 Physiotherapists’ approaches to low back pain education Physiotherapy 86: 427–433. [Crossref], [Google Scholar]). This was done by facilitating them and guiding them, using education and dialogue to determine the patients’ goals (Larsson, Liljedahl, and Gard, 2010Larsson I, Liljedahl K, Gard G 2010 Physiotherapists’ experience of client participation in physiotherapy interventions: A phenomenographic study Advances in Physiotherapy 12: 217–223. [Taylor & Francis Online], [Google Scholar]; Leach, Cornwell, Fleming, and Haines, 2010Leach E, Cornwell P, Fleming J, Haines T 2010 Patient centered goal-setting in a subacute rehabilitation setting Disability and Rehabilitation 32: 159–172. [Taylor & Francis Online], [Web of Science ®], [Google Scholar]; Rindflesch, 2009Rindflesch AB 2009 A grounded-theory investigation of patient education in physical therapy practice Physiotherapy Theory and Practice 25: 193–202. [Taylor & Francis Online], [Google Scholar]; Thomson, 2008Thomson D 2008 An ethnographic study of physiotherapists’ perceptions of their interactions with patients on a chronic pain unit Physiotherapy Theory and Practice 24: 408–422. [Taylor & Francis Online], [Google Scholar]; Trede, 2000Trede FV 2000 Physiotherapists’ approaches to low back pain education Physiotherapy 86: 427–433. [Crossref], [Google Scholar]). Goals were mostly created in collaboration between the physiotherapist and the patient (Leach, Cornwell, Fleming, and Haines, 2010Leach E, Cornwell P, Fleming J, Haines T 2010 Patient centered goal-setting in a subacute rehabilitation setting Disability and Rehabilitation 32: 159–172. [Taylor & Francis Online], [Web of Science ®], [Google Scholar]; Trede, 2000Trede FV 2000 Physiotherapists’ approaches to low back pain education Physiotherapy 86: 427–433. [Crossref], [Google Scholar]). However, some physiotherapists made no or little mention of patient-centered goals (Pashley et al, 2010Pashley E, Powers A, McNamee N, Buivids R, Piccinin J, Gibson BE 2010 Discharge from outpatient orthopaedic physiotherapy: A qualitative descriptive study of physiotherapists’ practices Physiotherapy Canada 62: 224–234. [Crossref], [PubMed], [Web of Science ®], [Google Scholar]).

      Interesting point that patients do not spontaneously mention goal setting. How does this impact on your understanding of what patients value? If you reframe or guide the conversation to explore goals, will the patient feel heard? or managed?

    2. Communicative abilities of a patient-centered physiotherapist meant being receptive to what the patient has to say, correctly interpreted, and giving explanations in a way patients understand (Fleiss and Cohen, 1973Fleiss JL, Cohen J 1973 The equivalence of weighted kappa and the intraclass correlation coefficient as measures of reliability Educational and Psychological Measurement 33: 613–619. [Crossref], [Web of Science ®], [Google Scholar]; Trede, 2000Trede FV 2000 Physiotherapists’ approaches to low back pain education Physiotherapy 86: 427–433. [Crossref], [Google Scholar]). Purposefully changing communication styles depending on the patient (Hiller, Guillemin, and Delany, 2015Hiller A, Guillemin M, Delany C 2015 Exploring healthcare communication models in private physiotherapy practice Patient Education and Counseling 98: 1222–1228. [Crossref], [PubMed], [Web of Science ®], [Google Scholar]). Having the ability to explain in lay terms, directly speaking to the patient, listening, and asking appropriate questions were of importance (Cooper, Smith, and Hancock, 2008Cooper K, Smith BH, Hancock E 2008 Patient-centredness in physiotherapy from the perspective of the chronic low back pain patient Physiotherapy 94: 244–252. [Crossref], [Web of Science ®], [Google Scholar]; Kidd, Bond, and Bell, 2011Kidd MO, Bond CH, Bell ML 2011 Patients’ perspectives of patient-centredness as important in musculoskeletal physiotherapy interactions: A qualitative study Physiotherapy 97: 154–162. [Crossref], [PubMed], [Web of Science ®], [Google Scholar]; Pashley et al, 2010Pashley E, Powers A, McNamee N, Buivids R, Piccinin J, Gibson BE 2010 Discharge from outpatient orthopaedic physiotherapy: A qualitative descriptive study of physiotherapists’ practices Physiotherapy Canada 62: 224–234. [Crossref], [PubMed], [Web of Science ®], [Google Scholar]; Potter, Gordon, and Hamer, 2003Potter M, Gordon S, Hamer P 2003 The physiotherapy experience in private practice: The patients’ perspective Australian Journal of Physiotherapy 49: 195–202. [Crossref], [PubMed], [Web of Science ®], [Google Scholar]).
    3. Personal communication and communication skills were far more important than the provision of scientific facts (Trede, 2000Trede FV 2000 Physiotherapists’ approaches to low back pain education Physiotherapy 86: 427–433. [Crossref], [Google Scholar]). By personal communication, a bond was established and the therapy shifted from therapist to patient centered (Hiller, Guillemin, and Delany, 2015Hiller A, Guillemin M, Delany C 2015 Exploring healthcare communication models in private physiotherapy practice Patient Education and Counseling 98: 1222–1228. [Crossref], [PubMed], [Web of Science ®], [Google Scholar]).

      communication far more important that provision of scientific facts

    4. Figure 2. Proposed framework for patient-centeredness in physiotherapy.

      proposed framework for patient centredness in physiotherapy

    1. McAllister et al. highlighted the importance of the clinical consultation as a conversation, paced and directed by both participants [5McAllister M, Matarasso B, Dixon B, et al. Conversation starters: re-examining and reconstructing first encounters within the therapeutic relationship. J Psychiatr Ment Health Nurs. 2004;11:575–582. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2850.2004.00763.x [Crossref], [PubMed], [Google Scholar]]. Sacks et al. maintain that people take turns to talk by following a set of conventional rules that assign speaker time and direction, and any deviation could indicate a person's attempt to display power, status or influence [6Sacks H, Schegloff EA, Jefferson G. A simplest systematics for the organization of turn-taking for conversation. Language. 1974;50(4):696–735. doi: 10.1353/lan.1974.0010 [Crossref], [Web of Science ®], [Google Scholar]]. Interruptions may not simply be a reflection of status or dominance however, they may reflect a speaker's enthusiasm, interest or spontaneity [22Irish JT, Hall JA. Interruptive patterns in medical visits: the effects of role, status and gender. Soc Sci Med. 1995;41(6):873–881. doi: 10.1016/0277-9536(94)00399-E [Crossref], [PubMed], [Web of Science ®], [Google Scholar]]. Furthermore, it is important they are not interpreted as signs of power, control or dominance, rather they are indicative of interpersonal relationships, such as neutrality, power or rapport [39Goldberg JA. Interrupting the discourse on interruptions. J Pragmat. 1990;14:883–903. doi: 10.1016/0378-2166(90)90045-F [Crossref], [Google Scholar]], which is particularly pertinent to healthcare where power differentials prevail. This was seen in the current study, both in theme 3, and when the patient interjects with humour in the penultimate quote. Practical guides to clinical communication skills concur with Sacks’ model and the two most important skills have been identified as: the ability to allow the patient to speak without interruption; and the ability to truly hear what the patient is trying to say [40Jackson C. Shut up and listen. A brief guide to clinical communication skills. Dundee: Dundee University Press; 2006; p. 1. [Google Scholar]].

      power in the clinical conversation.

      Practical guides to clinical communication skills concur with Sacks’ model and the two most important skills have been identified as: the ability to allow the patient to speak without interruption; and the ability to truly hear what the patient is trying to say [40Jackson C. Shut up and listen. A brief guide to clinical communication skills. Dundee: Dundee University Press; 2006; p. 1. [Google Scholar] ].

    2. McAllister et al. highlighted the importance of the clinical consultation as a conversation, paced and directed by both participants [5McAllister M, Matarasso B, Dixon B, et al. Conversation starters: re-examining and reconstructing first encounters within the therapeutic relationship. J Psychiatr Ment Health Nurs. 2004;11:575–582. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2850.2004.00763.x [Crossref], [PubMed], [Google Scholar]]. Sacks et al. maintain that people take turns to talk by following a set of conventional rules that assign speaker time and direction, and any deviation could indicate a person's attempt to display power, status or influence [6Sacks H, Schegloff EA, Jefferson G. A simplest systematics for the organization of turn-taking for conversation. Language. 1974;50(4):696–735. doi: 10.1353/lan.1974.0010 [Crossref], [Web of Science ®], [Google Scholar]]. Interruptions may not simply be a reflection of status or dominance however, they may reflect a speaker's enthusiasm, interest or spontaneity [22Irish JT, Hall JA. Interruptive patterns in medical visits: the effects of role, status and gender. Soc Sci Med. 1995;41(6):873–881. doi: 10.1016/0277-9536(94)00399-E [Crossref], [PubMed], [Web of Science ®], [Google Scholar]]. Furthermore, it is important they are not interpreted as signs of power, control or dominance, rather they are indicative of interpersonal relationships, such as neutrality, power or rapport [39Goldberg JA. Interrupting the discourse on interruptions. J Pragmat. 1990;14:883–903. doi: 10.1016/0378-2166(90)90045-F [Crossref], [Google Scholar]], which is particularly pertinent to healthcare where power differentials prevail. This was seen in the current study, both in theme 3, and when the patient interjects with humour in the penultimate quote. Practical guides to clinical communication skills concur with Sacks’ model and the two most important skills have been identified as: the ability to allow the patient to speak without interruption; and the ability to truly hear what the patient is trying to say [40Jackson C. Shut up and listen. A brief guide to clinical communication skills. Dundee: Dundee University Press; 2006; p. 1. [Google Scholar]].

      Practical guides to clinical communication skills concur with Sacks’ model and the two most important skills have been identified as: the ability to allow the patient to speak without interruption; and the ability to truly hear what the patient is trying to say [40Jackson C. Shut up and listen. A brief guide to clinical communication skills. Dundee: Dundee University Press; 2006; p. 1. [Google Scholar] ].

    3. Clinical implicationsTo the best of our knowledge, this is the first time the prevalence and nature of overlaps and interruptions have been reported in patients presenting with low back pain. This work has highlighted the complexity of evaluating the impact of communication during clinical encounters. Clinicians need to ensure that the pendulum of current clinical practice does not swing towards pathoanatomy and physiology, biomechanics and technological advances at the expense of treating the patient as a person and providing truly patient-centred care. Therefore, clinicians at the forefront of practice, whatever their profession, need to invest time evaluating and developing their own communication skills (for example by audio-recording consultations or engaging in peer observation, with patients’ consent) to optimize non-specific treatment effects and ultimately enhance patients’ experience and outcomes.

      noting the importance of taking time to evaluate and develop your clinical communication skills.

    1. Whilst this study intended to explore participants’ perceptions of the impact of empathy on a clinical encounter, participants focused their discussion on how the attributes of both the clinician and patient, as well as external factors, could affect the delivery of empathy during a clinical encounter. Participants identified building rapport, active listening, verbal and non-verbal communication to be factors that could influence the patient-clinician relationship, which is supported in the literature, alongside empathy which has been shown to affect the patient-clinician relationship, improving clinical outcomes, diagnoses and adherence to therapy [3Hojat M, Mangione S, Kane G, et al. Relationships between scores of the Jefferson Scale of Physician Empathy (JSPE) and the Interpersonal Reactivity Index (IRI). Med Teach. 2005;27(7):625–628. doi: 10.1080/01421590500069744 [Taylor & Francis Online], [Web of Science ®], [Google Scholar],8–12Beck R, Daughtbridge R, Sloane P. Physician-patient communication in the primary care office: a systematic review. J Am Board Fam Med. 2002;15(1):25–38. [Google Scholar]Hojat M, Gonnella J, Nasca T, et al. Physician empathy: definition, components, measurement, and relationship to gender and specialty. Am J Psychiat. 2002;159(9):1563–1569. doi: 10.1176/appi.ajp.159.9.1563 [Crossref], [PubMed], [Web of Science ®], [Google Scholar]Shapiro J, Morrison E, Boker J. Teaching empathy to first year medical students: evaluation of an elective literature and medicine course. Educ Health: Change in Learn Practice. 2004;17(1):73–84. doi: 10.1080/13576280310001656196 [Crossref], [PubMed], [Google Scholar]Stepien K, Baernstein A. Educating for empathy. J Gen Intern Med. 2006;21(5):524–530. doi: 10.1111/j.1525-1497.2006.00443.x [Crossref], [PubMed], [Web of Science ®], [Google Scholar]Rakel D, Barrett B, Zhang Z, et al. Perception of empathy in the therapeutic encounter: effects on the common cold. Patient Educ Couns. 2011;85(3):390–397. doi: 10.1016/j.pec.2011.01.009 [Crossref], [PubMed], [Web of Science ®], [Google Scholar]].

      This paragraph mentions one of the key skills from the health coaching conversation module. - note relevance to practice

    2. The key finding from this study indicates that teaching empathy per se, may be best done when working in a clinical setting, as clinicians are able to draw on their clinical experience and immediately take new ideas into their clinical encounters to further enhance their skills. Whilst methods of developing empathy in students have been shown to be successful [16Brunero S, Lamont S, Coates M. A review of empathy education in nursing. Nurs Inq. 2010;17(1):65–74. doi: 10.1111/j.1440-1800.2009.00482.x [Crossref], [PubMed], [Web of Science ®], [Google Scholar],20Bombeke K, Van Roosbroeck S, De Winter B, et al. Medical students trained in communication skills show a decline in patient-centred attitudes: an observational study comparing two cohorts during clinical clerkships. Patient Educ Couns. 2011;84(3):310–318. doi: 10.1016/j.pec.2011.03.007 [Crossref], [PubMed], [Web of Science ®], [Google Scholar],21Batt-Rawden S, Chisolm M, Anton B, et al. Teaching empathy to medical students. Acad Med. 2013;88(8):1171–1177. doi: 10.1097/ACM.0b013e318299f3e3 [Crossref], [PubMed], [Web of Science ®], [Google Scholar],27Fernández-Olano C, Montoya-Fernández J, Salinas-Sánchez A. Impact of clinical interview training on the empathy level of medical students and medical residents. Med Teach. 2008;30(3):322–324. doi: 10.1080/01421590701802299 [Taylor & Francis Online], [Web of Science ®], [Google Scholar],31Lim B, Moriarty H, Huthwaite M. “Being-in-role”: a teaching innovation to enhance empathic communication skills in medical students. Med Teach. 2011;33(12):e663–e669. doi: 10.3109/0142159X.2011.611193 [Taylor & Francis Online], [Web of Science ®], [Google Scholar],33–36Bayne H. Training medical students in empathic communication. J Spec Group Work. 2011;36:316–329. doi: 10.1080/01933922.2011.613899 [Taylor & Francis Online], [Google Scholar]Norfolk T, Birdi K, Walsh D. The role of empathy in establishing rapport in the consultation: a new model. Med Educ. 2007;41:690–697. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2923.2007.02789.x [Crossref], [PubMed], [Web of Science ®], [Google Scholar]Das Gupta S, Charon R. Personal illness narratives: using reflective writing to teach empathy. Acad Med. 2004;79:351–356. doi: 10.1097/00001888-200404000-00013 [Crossref], [PubMed], [Web of Science ®], [Google Scholar]Tiuraniemi J, Läärä R, Kyrö T, et al. Medical and psychology students’ self-assessed communication skills: a pilot study. Patient Educ Couns. 2011;83:152–157. doi: 10.1016/j.pec.2010.05.013 [Crossref], [PubMed], [Web of Science ®], [Google Scholar]], the increase in empathy levels has not been shown to have a carry over longer than 7 days following the intervention,[16Brunero S, Lamont S, Coates M. A review of empathy education in nursing. Nurs Inq. 2010;17(1):65–74. doi: 10.1111/j.1440-1800.2009.00482.x [Crossref], [PubMed], [Web of Science ®], [Google Scholar],35Das Gupta S, Charon R. Personal illness narratives: using reflective writing to teach empathy. Acad Med. 2004;79:351–356. doi: 10.1097/00001888-200404000-00013 [Crossref], [PubMed], [Web of Science ®], [Google Scholar]]. Multiple studies, however, have identified a decrease in empathy levels in medical and healthcare students over the duration of their education [6Nunes P, Williams S, Sa B, et al. A study of empathy decline in students from five health disciplines during their first year of training. Int J Med Educ. 2011;2:12–17. doi: 10.5116/ijme.4d47.ddb0 [Crossref], [Google Scholar],16Brunero S, Lamont S, Coates M. A review of empathy education in nursing. Nurs Inq. 2010;17(1):65–74. doi: 10.1111/j.1440-1800.2009.00482.x [Crossref], [PubMed], [Web of Science ®], [Google Scholar],19Hojat M, Vergare M, Maxwell K, et al. The devil is in the third year: a longitudinal study of erosion of empathy in medical school. Acad Med. 2009;84(9):1182–1191. doi: 10.1097/ACM.0b013e3181b17e55 [Crossref], [PubMed], [Web of Science ®], [Google Scholar],20Bombeke K, Van Roosbroeck S, De Winter B, et al. Medical students trained in communication skills show a decline in patient-centred attitudes: an observational study comparing two cohorts during clinical clerkships. Patient Educ Couns. 2011;84(3):310–318. doi: 10.1016/j.pec.2011.03.007 [Crossref], [PubMed], [Web of Science ®], [Google Scholar],23Sherman J, Cramer A. Measurement of changes in empathy during dental school. J Dent Educ. 2005;69(3):338–345. [Crossref], [PubMed], [Google Scholar]], and in a review of these studies [24Neumann M, Edelhäuser F, Tauschel D, et al. Empathy decline and its reasons: a systematic review of studies with medical students and residents. Acad Med. 2011;86(8):996–1009. doi: 10.1097/ACM.0b013e318221e615 [Crossref], [PubMed], [Web of Science ®], [Google Scholar]], the authors identified four possible reasons for this: negative experiences with clinical supervisors; a feeling of vulnerability as a student, resulting in reduced self-confidence; a lack of social support and increased workload combined with long clinical placement hours [24Neumann M, Edelhäuser F, Tauschel D, et al. Empathy decline and its reasons: a systematic review of studies with medical students and residents. Acad Med. 2011;86(8):996–1009. doi: 10.1097/ACM.0b013e318221e615 [Crossref], [PubMed], [Web of Science ®], [Google Scholar]]. The student physiotherapists in this study stated that there were multiple factors to focus on whilst on clinical placement, and that their focus was more on their personal development and academic grades rather than their focus being on empathising and communicating with patients. Students did however acknowledge the importance of empathic communication during clinical encounters, but deemed other aspects of their education to be a priority. Neumann et al. [24Neumann M, Edelhäuser F, Tauschel D, et al. Empathy decline and its reasons: a systematic review of studies with medical students and residents. Acad Med. 2011;86(8):996–1009. doi: 10.1097/ACM.0b013e318221e615 [Crossref], [PubMed], [Web of Science ®], [Google Scholar]] report similar findings, with medical students’ empathy levels showing a significant decline at the point that they enter clinical practice during their educational programme, due to their focus on academic work, improving clinical skills and lack of time to relax and de-stress.

      barriers for students developing and practicing skills in communication and empathy

    1. Nobody ever says rubber ducky debugging involves writing memos to your preferred duck, after all.

      Seemingly both rubber duck debugging and casual conversations with acquaintances would seem to be soft forms of diffuse thinking which may help one come to a heuristic-based decision or realization.

      These may be useful, but should also be used in combination with more logical, system two forms of decision making. (At least not in the quick, notice the problem sort of issues in which one may be debugging.)

    1. That is to make notes about the shape of the discussion-the discussion that is engaged in by all of the authors,even if unbeknownst to them. For reasons that will becomeclear in Part Four, we prefer to call such notes dialectical.

      Dialectical notes are made at the level of syntopical reading and entail creating a conversation not only between the reader and the author, but create a conversation of questions and answers between and among many texts and the reader.

    2. Marking a book is literally an expression of your differences or your agreements with the author. It is the highest respect you can pay him.
    3. Reading a book should be a conversation between you andthe author.
    1. https://infiniteconversation.com/

      an AI generated, never-ending discussion between Werner Herzog and Slavoj Žižek. Everything you hear is fully generated by a machine. The opinions and beliefs expressed do not represent anyone. They are the hallucinations of a slab of silicon.

  3. Oct 2022
    1. t may be that in using his system hedeveloped his mind and his knowledge of history to the point wherehe expected his readers to draw more inferences from the facts heselected than most modern readers are accustomed to doing, in thisday of the predigested book.

      It's possible that the process of note taking and excerpting may impose levels of analysis and synthesis on their users such that when writing and synthesizing their works that they more subtly expect their readers to do the same thing when their audiences may require more handholding and explanation.

      Here, both the authors' experiences and that of the cultures in which they're writing will determine the relationship.


      There's lots of analogies between thinking and digesting (rumination, consumption, etc), in reading and understanding contexts.

    1. https://www.explainpaper.com/

      Another in a growing line of research tools for processing and making sense of research literature including Research Rabbit, Connected Papers, Semantic Scholar, etc.

      Functionality includes the ability to highlight sections of research papers with natural language processing to explain what those sections mean. There's also a "chat" that allows you to ask questions about the paper which will attempt to return reasonable answers, which is an artificial intelligence sort of means of having an artificial "conversation with the text".

      cc: @dwhly @remikalir @jeremydean

    1. For her online book clubs, Maggie Delano defines four broad types of notes as a template for users to have a common language: - terms - propositions (arguments, claims) - questions - sources (references which support the above three types)

      I'm fairly sure in a separate context, I've heard that these were broadly lifted from her reading of Mortimer J. Adler's How to Read a book. (reference? an early session of Dan Allosso's Obsidian Book club?)

      These become the backbone of breaking down a book and using them to have a conversation with the author.

    1. PKM is coming full circle to be a framework for people to connect and make sense without jumping on airplanes and convening in fancy conference ballrooms. It’s using digital networks for people to understand people. PKM takes time and effort but not endless hours in airports, airplanes, taxis, and conference rooms. I embrace th

      I agree, it's all about the interaction and digital makes that easier, richer and ever more powerful. Reading that paragraph I also realise that my own practical interpretation is simultaneously one more of private knowledge management, rather than personal embedded in my network. Am happy to share my pkm practices, am happy to share most of the material I process in my pkm system, but the core of it feels private, perhaps due to seeing it as fragile still / less robust types of insights?

    1. certainly surrounding oneself with acircle of people who will listen and t a l k - - a n d at times theyhave to be imaginary characters--is one of them

      Intellectual work requires "surfaces" to work against, almost as an exact analogy to substrates in chemistry which help to catalyze reactions. The surfaces may include: - articles, books, or other writing against which one can think and write - colleagues, friends, family, other thinkers, or even imaginary characters (as suggested by C. Wright Mills) - one's past self as instantiated by their (imperfect) memory or by their notes about excerpted ideas or their own thoughts


      Are there any other surfaces we're missing?

    2. Merely to name an item of experience often invitesus to explain it; the mere taking of a note from a book isoften a prod to reflection.
  4. Sep 2022
    1. But having a conversation partner in your topic is actually ideal!

      What's the solution: dig into your primary sources. Ask open-ended questions, and refine them as you go. Be open to new lines of inquiry. Stage your work in Conversation with so-and-so [ previously defined as the author of the text].

      Stacy Fahrenthold recommends digging into primary sources and using them (and their author(s) as a "conversation partner". She doesn't mention using either one's memory or one's notes as a communication partner the way Luhmann does in "Kommunikation mit Zettelkästen" (1981), which can be an incredibly fruitful and creative method for original material.

      http://luhmann.surge.sh/communicating-with-slip-boxes

  5. Aug 2022
    1. Ballpoint pens are not tools for marking books, and felt-tip highlighters should be prohibited altogether.

      How is one to have an intimate conversation with a text if their annotations are not written in the margins? Placing your initial notes somewhere else is like having sex with your clothes on.

      syndication link

    1. I think the skill involved will be similar to being a good improv partner, that’s what it reminds me of.

      that sounds like a useful analogy. Prompting like you are the algo's improv partner. The flipside seems to be the impact the author himself is after: being prompted along new lines of inquiry, making the script your improv partner in return.

    2. A blog post is a very long and complex search query to find fascinating people and make them route interesting stuff to your inbox.

      This phrasing imo instrumentalises those fascinating people you find. Interesting stuff is a byproduct of interacting with those fascinating people, a result from fascinating conversation, a residue of the construct you've built together in conversation.

  6. Jul 2022
    1. We read different texts for different reasons, regardlessof the subject.

      A useful analogy here might be the idea of having a conversation with a text. Much the way you'd have dramatically different conversations with your family versus your friends, your teachers, or a stranger in line at the store, you'll approach each particular in a different way based on the various contexts in which both they exist and the contexts which you bring to them.

    2. Writing about anything – a novel, a historical primarysource, an exam question – is at least a three-waydialogue.

      Possibly even more than three ways, depending on how many are participating in the margins here. ;)

  7. Jun 2022
    1. When a few of his friends became interested in thetopic, he took eight minutes to progressively summarize the bestexcerpts before sharing the summarized article with them. The timethat he had spent reading and understanding a complex subject paidoff in time savings for his friends, while also giving them a newinterest to connect over.

      To test one's own understanding of a topic one has read about and studied, it can be useful to discuss it or describe one's understanding to friends or colleagues in conversations. This will help you discover where the holes are based on the person's understanding and comprehension of what you've said. Can you fill in all the holes where they have questions? Are their questions your new questions which have exposed holes that need to be filled in your understanding or in the space itself.

      I do this regularly in conversations with people. It makes the topics of conversation more varied and interesting and helps out your thinking at the same time. In particular I've been doing this method in Dan Allosso's book club. It's almost like trying on a new idea the way one might try on a piece of clothing to see how it fits or how one likes it for potential purchase. If an idea "fits" then continue refining it and add it to your knowledge base. These conversations also help to better link ideas in my thought space to those of what we're reading. (I wonder if others are doing these same patterns, Dan seems to, but I don't have as good a grasp on this with other participants).

      Link to :<br /> - Ahren's idea of writing to expose understanding<br /> - Feynman technique<br /> - Socratic method (this is sort of side or tangential method to this) <- define this better/refine

    2. Third, sharing our ideas with others introduces a major element ofserendipity. When you present an idea to another person, theirreaction is inherently unpredictable. They will often be completelyuninterested in an aspect you think is utterly fascinating; they aren’tnecessarily right or wrong, but you can use that information eitherway. The reverse can also happen. You might think something isobvious, while they find it mind-blowing. That is also usefulinformation. Others might point out aspects of an idea you neverconsidered, suggest looking at sources you never knew existed, orcontribute their own ideas to make it better. All these forms offeedback are ways of drawing on not only your first and SecondBrains, but the brains of others as well.

      I like that he touches on one of the important parts of the gardens and streams portion of online digital gardens here, though he doesn't tacitly frame it this way.

    1. It would lack a unique personality or an “alter ego,” which is what Luhmann’s system aimed to create. (9)

      Is there evidence that Luhmann's system aimed to create anything from the start in a sort of autopoietic sense? Or is it (more likely) the case that Luhmann saw this sort of "alter ego" emerging over time and described it after-the-fact?

      Based on his experiences and note takers and zettelkasten users might expect this outcome now.

      Are there examples of prior commonplace book users or note takers seeing or describing this sort of experience in the historical record?


      Related to this is the idea that a reader might have a conversation with another author by reading and writing their own notes from a particular text.

      The only real difference here is that one's notes and the ability to link them to other ideas or topical headings in a commonplace book or zettelkasten means that the reader/writer has an infinitely growable perfect memory.

  8. May 2022
    1. a constellation already described in 1805 by Heinrich von Kleist in his fascinat-ing analysis of the “Midwifery of Thought”: “If you want to know something and cannotfind it through meditation, I advise you, my dear, clever friend, to speak about it withthe next acquaintance who bumps into you.” 43 The positive tension that such a conversa-tion immediately elicits through the expectations of the Other obliges one to producenew thought in the conversation. The idea develops during speech. There, the sheeravailability of such a counterpart, who must do nothing further (i.e., offer additionalstimulus through keen contradiction of the speaker) is already enough; “There is a specialsource of excitement, for him who speaks, in the human face across from him; and agaze which already announces a half-expressed thought to be understood often givesexpression to the entire other half.”44
      1. Heinrich von Kleist, “Ü ber die allm ä hliche Verfertigung der Gedanken beim Reden,” in Sämtliche Werke und Briefe. Zweiter Band, ed. Helmut Sembdner (M ü nchen: dtv, 1805/2001), 319 – 324, at 319.
      2. Ibid., 320.

      in 1805 Heinrich von Kleist noted that one can use conversation with another person, even when that person is silent, to come up with solutions or ideas they may not have done on their own.

      This phenomena is borne out in modern practices like the so-called "rubber duck debugging", where a programmer can talk to any imagined listener, often framed as a rubber duck sitting on their desk, and talk through the problem in their code. Invariably, talking through all the steps of the problem will often result in the person realizing what the problem is and allow them to fix it.

      This method of verbal "conversation" obviously was a tool which indigenous oral cultures frequently used despite the fact that they didn't have literacy as a tool to fall back on.

  9. Apr 2022
    1. it starts with 00:32:31 this one kind of thing called single finger and these are all just variations or practice styles [Music] 00:32:45 and then octave double stop skills [Music] and you know just down the list but you know these things are all developed 00:32:59 through the practice the daily practice but then once once they've been developed then i can just plug them into songs and and create so that's just i'm really excited about this form like the fiddle wrong is because

      Jason Kleinberg takes basic tunes and then has a list of variations of practice styles which he runs through with each one (eg. single-finger, octave double stops scale, old-time, polkafy, blues, etc.) and he plays those tunes in these modified styles not only to practice, but to take these "musical conversations" and translate them into his own words. This is a clever way of generating new music and potentially even new styles by mixing those which have come before. To a great sense, he's having a musical conversation with prior composers and musicians in the same way that an annotator will have a conversation in the margins with an author. It's also an example of the sort of combinatorial creativity suggested by Raymond Llull's work.

    1. solo thinking isrooted in our lifelong experience of social interaction; linguists and cognitivescientists theorize that the constant patter we carry on in our heads is a kind ofinternalized conversation. Our brains evolved to think with people: to teachthem, to argue with them, to exchange stories with them. Human thought isexquisitely sensitive to context, and one of the most powerful contexts of all isthe presence of other people. As a consequence, when we think socially, wethink differently—and often better—than when we think non-socially.

      People have evolved as social animals and this extends to thinking and interacting. We think better when we think socially (in groups) as opposed to thinking alone.

      This in part may be why solo reading and annotating improves one's thinking because it is a form of social annotation between the lone annotator and the author. Actual social annotation amongst groups may add additonal power to this method.

      I personally annotate alone, though I typically do so in a publicly discoverable fashion within Hypothes.is. While the audience of my annotations may be exceedingly low, there is at least a perceived public for my output. Thus my thinking, though done alone, is accelerated and improved by the potential social context in which it's done. (Hello, dear reader! 🥰) I can artificially take advantage of the social learning effects even if the social circle may mathematically approach the limit of an audience of one (me).

    2. A 2019 study published in the Proceedings of the National Academy ofSciences supports Wieman’s hunch. Tracking the intellectual advancement ofseveral hundred graduate students in the sciences over the course of four years,its authors found that the development of crucial skills such as generatinghypotheses, designing experiments, and analyzing data was closely related to thestudents’ engagement with their peers in the lab, and not to the guidance theyreceived from their faculty mentors.

      Learning has been shown to be linked to engagement with peers in social situations over guidance from faculty mentors.

      Cross reference: David F. Feldon et al., “Postdocs’ Lab Engagement Predicts Trajectories of PhD Students’ Skill Development,” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 116 (October 2019): 20910–16


      Are there areas where this is not the case? Are there areas where this is more the case than not?

      Is it our evolution as social animals that has heightened this effect? How could this be shown? (Link this to prior note about social evolution.)

      Is it the ability to scaffold out questions and answers and find their way by slowly building up experience with each other that facilitates this effect?

      Could this effect be seen in annotating texts as well? If one's annotations become a conversation with the author, is there a learning benefit even when the author can't respond? By trying out writing about one's understanding of a text and seeing where the gaps are and then revisiting the text to fill them in, do we gain this same sort of peer engagement? How can we encourage students to ask questions to the author and/or themselves in the margins? How can we encourage them to further think about and explore these questions? Answer these questions over time?

      A key part of the solution is not just writing the annotations down in the first place, but keeping them, reviewing over them, linking them together, revisiting them and slowly providing answers and building solutions for both themselves and, by writing them down, hopefully for others as well.

    1. 3. Who are you annotating with? Learning usually needs a certain degree of protection, a safe space. Groups can provide that, but public space often less so. In Hypothes.is who are you annotating with? Everybody? Specific groups of learners? Just yourself and one or two others? All of that, depending on the text you’re annotating? How granular is your control over the sharing with groups, so that you can choose your level of learning safety?

      This is a great question and I ask it frequently with many different answers.

      I've not seen specific numbers, but I suspect that the majority of Hypothes.is users are annotating in small private groups/classes using their learning management system (LMS) integrations through their university. As a result, using it and hoping for a big social experience is going to be discouraging for most.

      Of course this doesn't mean that no one is out there. After all, here you are following my RSS feed of annotations and asking these questions!

      I'd say that 95+% or more of my annotations are ultimately for my own learning and ends. If others stumble upon them and find them interesting, then great! But I'm not really here for them.

      As more people have begun using Hypothes.is over the past few years I have slowly but surely run into people hiding in the margins of texts and quietly interacted with them and begun to know some of them. Often they're also on Twitter or have their own websites too which only adds to the social glue. It has been one of the slowest social media experiences I've ever had (even in comparison to old school blogging where discovery is much higher in general use). There has been a small uptick (anecdotally) in Hypothes.is use by some in the note taking application space (Obsidian, Roam Research, Logseq, etc.), so I've seen some of them from time to time.

      I can only think of one time in the last five or so years in which I happened to be "in a text" and a total stranger was coincidentally reading and annotating at the same time. There have been a few times I've specifically been in a shared text with a small group annotating simultaneously. Other than this it's all been asynchronous experiences.

      There are a few people working at some of the social side of Hypothes.is if you're searching for it, though even their Hypothes.is presences may seem as sparse as your own at present @tonz.

      Some examples:

      @peterhagen Has built an alternate interface for the main Hypothes.is feed that adds some additional discovery dimensions you might find interesting. It highlights some frequent annotators and provide a more visual feed of what's happening on the public Hypothes.is timeline as well as data from HackerNews.

      @flancian maintains anagora.org, which is like a planet of wikis and related applications, where he keeps a list of annotations on Hypothes.is by members of the collective at https://anagora.org/latest

      @tomcritchlow has experimented with using Hypothes.is as a "traditional" comments section on his personal website.

      @remikalir has a nice little tool https://crowdlaaers.org/ for looking at documents with lots of annotations.

      Right now, I'm also in an Obsidian-based book club run by Dan Allosso in which some of us are actively annotating the two books using Hypothes.is and dovetailing some of this with activity in a shared Obsidian vault. see: https://boffosocko.com/2022/03/24/55803196/. While there is a small private group for our annotations a few of us are still annotating the books in public. Perhaps if I had a group of people who were heavily interested in keeping a group going on a regular basis, I might find the value in it, but until then public is better and I'm more likely to come across and see more of what's happening out there.

      I've got a collection of odd Hypothes.is related quirks, off label use cases, and experiments: https://boffosocko.com/tag/hypothes.is/ including a list of those I frequently follow: https://boffosocko.com/about/following/#Hypothesis%20Feeds

      Like good annotations and notes, you've got to put some work into finding the social portion what's happening in this fun little space. My best recommendation to find your "tribe" is to do some targeted tag searches in their search box to see who's annotating things in which you're interested.

    2. Where annotation is not an individual activity, jotting down marginalia in solitude, but a dialogue between multiple annotators in the now, or incrementally adding to annotators from the past.

      My first view, even before any of the potential social annotation angle, is that in annotating or taking notes, I'm simultaneously having a conversation with the author of the work and/or my own thoughts on the topic at hand. Anything beyond that for me is "gravy".

      I occasionally find that if I'm writing as I go that I'll have questions and take a stab only to find that the author provides an answer a few paragraphs or pages on. I can then look back at my thought to see where I got things right, where I may have missed or where to go from there. Sometimes I'll find holes that both the author and I missed. Almost always I'm glad that I spent the time thinking about the idea critically and got to the place myself with or without the author's help. I'm not sure that most others always do this, but it's a habit I've picked up from reading mathematics texts which frequently say things like "we'll leave it to the reader to verify or fill in the gaps" or "this is left as an exercise". Most readers won't/don't do this, but my view is that it's almost always where the actual engagement and learning from the material stems.

      Sometimes I may be writing out pieces to clarify them for myself and solidify my understanding while other times, I'm using the text as a prompt for my own writing. My intention most often is to add my own thoughts in a significantly well-thought out manner such that I can in the near future reuse these annotations/notes in essays or other writing. Some of this comes from broad experience of keeping a commonplace book for quite a while, and some of it has been influenced on reading about the history of note taking practices by others. One of the best summations of the overall practice I've seen thus far is Sönke Ahrens' How to Take Smart Notes (Create Space, 2017), though I find there are some practical steps missing that can only be found by actually practicing his methods in a dedicated fashion for several months before one sees changes in their thought patterns, the questions they ask, and the work that stems from it all. And by work, I mean just that. The whole enterprise is a fair amount of work, though I find it quite fun and very productive over time.

      In my youth, I'd read passages and come up with some brilliant ideas. I might have underlined the passage and written something like "revisit this and expand", but I found I almost never did and upon revisiting it I couldn't capture the spark of the brilliant idea I had managed to see before. Now I just take the time out to write out the entire thing then and there with the knowledge that I can then later revise it and work it into something bigger later. Doing the work right now has been one of the biggest differences in my practice, and I'm finding that projects I want to make progress on are moving forward much more rapidly than they ever did.

  10. Mar 2022
    1. Put Eidsheim 2015 and O'Callaghan 2007 in dialogue with each other.

      Brandon Lewis seems to be talking about actively taking two papers and placing them "in dialogue with each other" potentially by reading, annotating, and writing about them with himself as an intermediary.

  11. Feb 2022
    1. If you now think: “That’s ridiculous. Who would want to read andpretend to learn just for the illusion of learning and understanding?”please look up the statistics: The majority of students chooses everyday not to test themselves in any way. Instead, they apply the verymethod research has shown again (Karpicke, Butler, and Roediger2009) and again (Brown 2014, ch. 1) to be almost completelyuseless: rereading and underlining sentences for later rereading.And most of them choose that method, even if they are taught thatthey don’t work.

      Even when taught that some methods of learning don't work, students will still actively use and focus on them.


      Are those using social annotation purposely helping students to steer clear of these methods? is there evidence that the social part of some of these related annotation or conversational practices with both the text and one's colleagues helpful? Do they need to be taken out of the text and done in a more explicit manner in a lecture/discussion section or in a book club like setting similar to that of Dan Allossso's or even within a shared space like the Obsidian book club to have more value?

  12. Dec 2021
    1. there's an exception ah yes indeed there is an exception to that which is largely 00:08:28 when you're talking to someone else so in conversation and in dialogue you're actually can maintain consciousness for very long periods of time well which is why you need to imagine you're talking 00:08:41 to someone else to really be able to think out a problem

      Humans in general have a seven second window of self-consciousness. (What is the reference for this? Double check it.) The exception is when one is in conversation with someone else, and then people have much longer spans of self-consciousness.

      I'm left to wonder if this is a useful fact for writing in the margins in books or into one's notebook, commonplace book, or zettelkasten? By having a conversation with yourself, or more specifically with the imaginary author you're annotating or if you prefer to frame it as a conversation with your zettelkasten, one expands their self-consciousness for much longer periods of time? What benefit does this have for the individual? What benefit for humanity in aggregate?

      Is it this fact or just coincidence that much early philosophy was done as dialectic?

      From an orality perspective, this makes it much more useful to talk to one's surroundings or objects like rocks. Did mnemonic techniques help give rise to our ability to be more self-conscious as a species? Is it like a muscle that we've been slowly and evolutionarily exercising for 250,000 years?

    1. Every serious (academic) historical work includes a conversation with other scholarship, and this has largely carried over into popular historical writing.

      Any serious historical or other academic work should include a conversation with the body of other scholarship with which argues for or against.

      Comparing and contrasting one idea with another is crucial for any sort of advancement.

  13. Nov 2021
  14. Oct 2021
    1. A recent survey found that only 14% of people they surveyed in the United States talk about climate change. A previous Yale study found that 35% either discuss it occasionally or hear somebody else talk about it. Those are low for something that over 70% of people are worried about.

      Conversation is not happening! There is a leverage point in holding open conversations where we understand each other’s language of different cultural groups. Finding common ground, the common human denominators (CHD) between polarized groups is the lynchpin.

  15. Aug 2021
    1. If this blog had a tagline it would be "an ongoing conversation with myself."

      Here's an example of a blogger using the idea of writing a blog as being in conversation with himself.

      It obviously doesn't predate Niklas Luhmann's conversation with slip boxes, but the general tenor is certainly similar in form and function.

    1. Fleeting notes while reading is your way of having a conversation with the author. It may not eventuate to anything but the process instantly places agency back in your hands.

      The idea of taking notes here as a conversation both with onesself as well as the author is essentially the old idea of making annotations in the margins of a book.

      He's repackaging it in the framing of a zettelkasten, but it's the same sort of conversation that @remikalir talks about, though in that case Remi is usually talking about class-wide group conversations with a text.

      Cross-reference this with Luhmann's paper Communicating with Slip-boxes which is a portion of the story from the zettelkasten perspective.

      Certainly someone in the commonplace or annotation traditions mentioned the idea of a conversation? Either with themselves, with the author, or with the text itself? Was this ever tacitly acknowledged before Luhmann?

  16. Jul 2021
    1. Some instructional programs encourage students to engage in “metacognitive conversations” with themselves so that they can “talk” with themselves about their learning, the challenges they encounter, and the ways in which they can self-correct and continue learning.
      • how could this be used to help facilitate learning in public / social learning? I've often learned things through asking myself questions / writing notes / etc, and it then makes it easier to combine and share

      metacognitive conversations

  17. Jun 2021
    1. But it quickly began to feel, for me, like something more intense: a way to not just passively read but to fully enter a text, to collaborate with it, to mingle with an author on some kind of primary textual plane.

      Mingling with the author has a pleasant ring to it. Better than a "conversation with the text"? Definitely has a nicer warmth.

      He could have replace plane with something warmer as well.


      This is related in a way with the way [[Niklas Luhmann]] spoke about communicating with his [[Zettelkasten]] as means of collaborating. (See: http://luhmann.surge.sh/communicating-with-slip-boxes)

  18. Mar 2021
  19. Feb 2021
    1. the frozen nature of the text seem more like a feature than a bug, something they’ve deliberated chosen, rather than a flaw that they didn’t have time to correct.

      The thoughtfulness and design of of Hypothes.is is incredibly valuable to me specifically because it dramatically increases my textual productivity in combination with my digital commonplace book.

      Connect this to the Jeremy Dean's idea of it helping to facilitate a conversation with texts. Nate Angell had a specific quote of it somewhere, but it might also reside in this document: https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/14682753.2017.1362168

  20. Oct 2020
    1. Join my Discord here (Note access is now closed - DM me for an invite)

      I'm curious how this experiment turned out since it's been a while. Invite please (if you feel it's worked).

  21. Aug 2020
  22. May 2020
    1. While tree-space has an abundance of context, leaf-space has an abundance of salience.

      I've contemplated before how to keep the wiki-like edit history of a live simultaneous multi-chat in a client like etherpad. Each speaker has a different color and can type at the same time, but how could one archive the date/timestamps along with the original as well as who each speaker was?

  23. Jun 2018
    1. pushing them to create their own knowledge and contribute thoughtfully to ongoing academic and civic conversations

      contribute thoughtfully, connect kindly, and go boldly... I think Troy's words here are the umbrella goal. Don't you?

  24. Dec 2016
    1. I would like to further extend this practice-based project both theoretically and practically, by discussing the genealogy and correlations of ‘performative publishing’ with ideas such as ‘technotext’ (Hayles), ‘performative materiality’ (Drucker) and ‘liberature’ (Fajfer), alongside other projects and practices. As part of this I would like to explore the ethical and political challenges towards academic publishing these kind of concepts and practices pose. By using hypothes.is—an open source software/browser extension that enables an annotation layer on top of websites and online files and objects—which for this special disrupted issue of the Journal of Media Practice functions as a way to enable conversations around its processual papers, I would like to draw in these conversations around performative publications by directly setting up a dialogue with various theorists and the works, concepts, practices and values that connect to both this project and to performative publications as I envision them more in general.