Behav Brain Sci. 2014 Feb;37(1):105-19. doi: 10.1017/s0140525x1300277x.
In a recent New York Times column (April 15, 2013), David Brooks discussed how the big-data agenda lacks a coherent framework of social theory – a deficiency that the Bentley, O'Brien, and Brock (henceforth BOB) model was meant to overcome. Or, stated less pretentiously, the model was meant as a first step in that direction – a map that hopefully would serve as a minimal, practical, and accessible framework that behavioral scientists could use to analyze big data. Rather than treating big data as a record of, and also a predictor of, where and when certain behaviors might take place, the BOB model is interested in what big data reveal about how decisions are being made, how collective behavior evolves from daily to decadal time scales, and how this varies across communities.
在最近的《纽约时报》专栏(2013 年 4 月 15 日)中,大卫·布鲁克斯(David Brooks)讨论了大数据议程缺乏一个连贯的社会理论框架——这是本特利、奥布莱恩和布罗克(BOB)模型旨在克服的一个缺陷。或者,说得不那么自负,该模型旨在朝着这个方向迈出第一步——希望它成为行为科学家可以用来分析大数据的一个最小、实用和易于理解的框架。BOB 模型的兴趣不在于将大数据视为记录和预测某些行为可能发生的地点和时间,而是在于大数据揭示了决策是如何做出的,集体行为如何从日常到十年的时间尺度演变,以及这种变化在不同社区之间是如何变化的。