Change–why is it so difficult for schools and what can we do about it? That’s the theme of a weeklong thread at Dangerously Irrelevant that I highly recommend.
I ran across an article in Time Magazine this morning, “the Ewww Factor,” about a marketing study by Andrea Morales and Gavan Fitzsimons which found that the “disgust” factor associated with an item can be transferred to another item associated with it. So the delicious cookies in the shopping cart can be “tainted” by the negative association with the cat litter next to them in the cart. (I have this same issue with raw chicken touching any of my groceries!)
The end of the article explains that their next study covers the opposite effect–that is, that a positive association can transfer a positive vibe to the associated object.
As a librarian, I completely believe that the research will prove that to be true. When we booktalk a book, or show a class a cool and helpful website or database, students gravitate towards using that. When teachers recommend a book to their class or a movie, students have a positive association with that.
Witness an example of this in a 9th grade classroom blog from Arapahoe High School, where a ninth grader who is the “class scribe” for the blog is describing her teacher’s review of the summer reading list. She obviously cares about her teacher’s take on the different literary works on the list.
I think this “touch” translates to technology use as well. I think as we use and share these tools, it can give it a “positive association” on our campuses if we have a good relationship with the staff and students.
So all this brings me back to the idea of change, and that personal relationships in an organization are an extremely important part of change. The enthusiasm and support that a librarian or a technology specialist or a principal shares with a campus can create that positive “vibe” that creates an inviting environment for change, and just maybe, according to the new study, it “rubs off” on others.
Photo credit: Flickr http://www.flickr.com/photos/dawn_perry/318923932/
This is a good perspective on this Carolyn. I wonder if my negative take on the article will influence someone in a negative way they way yours might in a positive way.
I actually was reading along the article thinking this is interesting and then all of a sudden flashed back to when the kids were little and how NOT “mom-friendly” stores seemed to be.
Perhaps I was being very single-minded in thinking that negative/positive placement would be the only factor to consider when making these kinds of decisions. These studies are helpful in that statistically speaking they are correct but there is always that one weirdo like me that sees things a little different.
I may actually be a proof that in some ways that we are both correct, because what I was reading directly before this article was critical of advertising and that probably influenced me as well. The negative article next to this article made me view it in a negative light. By the same token, that shows that we all have personal associations with things that may have nothing to do with the item itself but with our own experience with it and can therefore be transient. The item remains the same but our experience may change our view of it.
I wonder how all this would translate to folksonomy and tagging. This article may have been tagged very differently by you and I.
Interesting point about tagging. I think the article was just a jumping off point for me. I like seeing how differently people view things.
LOL…I was thinking about this article today during our family lunch when a discussion of moldy bread came up, which elicited the “ewww” factor from everyone involved!