What strikes me reviewing our section’s music choices within the Palladio platform is the interconnectivity or correlation of everything. As humans have evolved in our communication, we tend to seek out connections between people and things. Whether hyperlinks, algorithms, or network theory in general, we are constantly in search of linkages.

Political implications of such groupings considering what data is missing, assumed, or misinterpreted.

By picking more than one musical track, each participant in this exercise was relying upon their own subjective choices and rationale. While the combination choices is interesting, the groupings don’t necessary provide an in-depth understanding of each individual’s rationale or their connections. For example, I sought to provide a robust and varied collection of music that represented different time periods and geographies while others may have selected their music on other preferences such as musical taste.

Interestingly, when you split the full view in half horizontally, 9 names were included in the bottom network with 7 at the top. Split down the middle vertically, it was an even 8 names on the left and 8 on the right. This analysis would indicate that the choices, of those included in the exercise, were relative evenly distributed.

While you may be able to justify your musical choices in the Quiz, there also may exist reasons why you did not choose other pieces. Can the reasons for these “null” choices ever be reflected/interpreted in the data? 

Instead of the solely representing the musical choices, perhaps a word cloud could have been developed that highlighted the choice rationale linking those choices with the tracks to provide a more wholesome overview of the selection process. Adding the choice variable and linking it to individuals and their selections would have provided a visualization that provided a more holistic correlation between choices and rationale.