In a complex world, the ability to simplify something in a way we can understand can be an essential skill. Poldrack (2024) says that statistics, for example, enables us to make “general statements that extend beyond specific observations” (p. 33). While not every observation or prediction will be right, they’re often “good enough” to be useful (Poldrack, 2024, p. 34). While the ability to simplify concepts or generalize data was essential while working in public relations, I’ve begun to understand that process much differently. Meadow and Yuan (1997) helped me put this in perspective as it relates to defining the concepts of data, information, and knowledge:

“It is generally impossible to know all the elements of information that lead to any given decision because digging that deeply into what a person is thinking about, and how, is bound to affect the thought process being monitored. It is only possible to consider the nature of a person’s or group of persons’ knowledge base; how, in general, it was created; what decisions were made; and what the effect of those decisions was” (p. 712).

Understanding Data, Information, & Knowledge through the Three Paradigms of HCI

Meadow and Yuan’s definitions of data, information, knowledge, and development are essential components in understanding the role of information and, by extension, what it means to be an information worker. One challenge to this is context: “information” can mean two very different things to two different people, or it can serve as a general term for a particular set of things. Neither way of thinking of information is necessarily wrong, they’re simply different, and agreeing upon common definitions for referring to these concepts can aid in thinking of data, information, and knowledge not just as general buckets, but as lenses through which we can approach information work more clearly.

It may be helpful to understand Meadow and Yuan’s definitions by examining them in tandem with the three paradigms of HCI (Harrison et al., 2023).

Data & Paradigm One

The first and second paradigms of HCI (Harrison et al., 2023, p.11) and certain definitions of “data” are considered “objective” knowledge (Meadow and Yuan, 1997, p.703). Harrison et al. says the goal of the first paradigm of HCI is to “optimize the fit of humans and machines,” and, to do so, data needs to be collected in order to identify and understand how to address issues from a “pragmatic approach” (p.3). Data can exist as a set of symbols that a recipient objectively knows are numbers–the combination of the numbers may make no sense to one recipient, but another recipient may possess a different level of understanding that enables them to convert that data into information (Meadow and Yuan, 1997, p. 704).

Information & Paradigm Two

The key with both information and the second paradigm of HCI is this processing that enables a recipient to recognize the potential for messages, phenomena, or data to be abstracted into something useful or not useful.

The levels of Meadow and Yuan’s definitions of information imply that, for a message or thing to be information, there is more of a process happening in the mind of the recipient than there is with data: “It is the realization of the potential of data” and, at its highest form, “the process of converting received messages, data, signs, or signals into knowledge” (p. 704-705). The difference between the first and second paradigms of HCI is that, under the second paradigm, a “phenomenon or problem” can be generalized and learned from as a model for how people and computers might process information (Harrison et al., 2023, p.4).

Knowledge & Paradigm Three

Meadow and Yuan (1997) and Harrison et al. (2023) both acknowledge the potential for overlap across the concepts they set out to discuss. As we know from our readings and class discussions, knowledge and paradigm three of HCI is where it can get confusing. Essentially, the third paradigm of HCI entails interacting with information as “a form of meaning making” among different contexts (Harrison et al., 2023, p.8). Meadow and Yuan (1997) also refer to meaning and “sense making” when discussing knowledge, and noticed that knowledge tends to be thought of as unique and individualized (p. 710). Both the third paradigm of HCI and knowledge depend on context and meaning, perspective and experience, and the relationships amongst context, meaning, perspective, and experience.

While working in public relations, one of the biggest challenges my team and I faced was our ability to define exactly what is “public relations,” areas in which it can positively impact a company, and what steps need to be taken to make it effective. Public relations is a wide-ranging field. When it comes to public relations in pop culture, some people tend to think of Samantha Jones’ glamorous publicity job in the television show “Sex and the City” (Pullar, 2024) or Olivia Pope’s fast-paced, “saving the world” job as a lucrative political fixer on “Scandal” (Weir, 2023). While those jobs (likely) exist, my day-to-day in technology and finance public relations was much, much different.

Through a simple Google search of “public relations definitions,” hundreds of results with just as many definitions return. Some in the industry take the task of defining public relations very seriously. In 2012, a group of professional public relations organizations created an initiative to agree upon a definitive definition of public relations (Elliot, 2012). After 927 definitions submitted and 1,447 votes cast, the winner was: “Public relations is a strategic communication process that builds mutually beneficial relationships between organizations and their publics” (Elliot, 2012).

As an outsider, it would be generous to say that the definition is vague. But based on my experience, having a simple or general framework of what public relations is was more beneficial than a super specific definition–it enabled us to tailor our definitions based on the situation, which turned out to be most effective and successful when working with clients. This is how I see Meadow and Yuan’s (1997) definitions of data, information, and knowledge, and the three paradigms of HCI from Harrison et al (2023): solid frameworks that allow for a plethora of applications that are relevant across a multitude of contexts.

References

• Elliott, S. (2012, March 2). Public relations defined, after an energetic public discussion. The New York Times. https://www.nytimes.com/2012/03/02/business/media/public-relations-a-topic-that-is-tricky-to-define.html

• Harrison, S., Tatar, D., & Sengers, P. (2023). The Three Paradigms of HCI NOT FOR CIRCULATION.

• Meadow, C. T., & Yuan, W. (2023). MEASURING THE IMPACT OF INFORMATION: DEFINING THE CONCEPTS.

• Poldrack, R. A. (2024, March 31). Statistical thinking for the 21st Century. Statistical Thinking for the 21st Century. https://github.com/statsthinking21/statsthinking21-core

• Pullar, J. (2024, March 22). SATC author Candace Bushnell on what the “Real life” Samantha Jones is like. marie claire. https://www.marieclaire.com.au/fashion/candace-bushnell-sex-and-the-city-real-life/

• Stanley, A. (2012, April 4). Washington Spin Doctor, Heal Thyself. The New York Times. https://www.nytimes.com/2012/04/05/arts/television/scandal-abc-political-drama-with-kerry-washington.html?_r=0

• Weir, K. (2023, January 1). Psychologists are rebranding the field, expanding the one-to-one therapy approach. Monitor on Psychology. https://www.apa.org/monitor/2023/01/trends-rebranding-psychology