Some people eat, sleep and chew gum, I do genealogy and write...

Saturday, February 9, 2019

Will Computer Programs Replace Genealogists?

With a combination of record hints, DNA tests and optical character recognition could a computer program construct a verified family tree? For many people living today, I believe this question has long been answered. Some time ago, MyHeritage.com introduced notes "Instant Discoveries" and I have seen the program time after time produce a valid and sourced, albeit limited, family tree for users. Given the research skills of the majority of people constructing family trees on the large online websites, it is only a matter of time before the online websites implement programming that automatically verifies and corrects entries.

Obviously, the main obstacle for the complete replacement of the genealogists lies in the implementation of optical character recognition software that can read handwriting, i.e. handwriting recognition software. With the addition of artificial intelligence, the need for human intervention would be minimized.

FamilySearch.org and MyHeritage.com have both implemented error correction technology that now advises users of inconsistencies in their existing family tree data. The step that is missing is to make such programming intervene in the entry process and correct the existing entries. An intermediate step would be to mark questionable entries this has already been implemented to a small degree on FamilySearch.org.

Many genealogists already rely on computer programs that analyze DNA tests which are now being used as a matter of course to resolve criminal actions in the courts. So let's suppose this scenario. You take a DNA test from a large online genealogy based website with sophisticated programming. Your DNA test is then matched to millions of other users of the same website. The program behind the website then constructs a potential family tree relationship between the users. Meanwhile, the program has been analyzing billions of written records. The information from those records is then integrated into the structure created by the DNA testing. Hypothetical relationships are then analyzed comparing the DNA testing results to the information contained in the written records. As is already possible, the program compiles a list of "sources" and determines the relative possibility of relationships based on the accumulated sources and the DNA testing results. Previously submitted family trees are further analyzed to see if they reinforce or detract from the constructed family tree data.

As this hypothetical system becomes more and more sophisticated, it will become at least as accurate as any present genealogical analysis. Missing parts of this constructed family tree will be noted due to missing source information, i.e. documents that support conclusions. How will this be any different than what we have today? It will be a lot more accurate.

What are the implications of this scenario? What were the implications of the Internet when it was first introduced? Will I still have a job in the future? Considering my age I doubt that this will happen before I end up in the care center or pass on to my reward. But for many people living today, this is not a merely theoretical possibility. Maybe worrying about whether or not you can get younger people involved in genealogical research does the wrong thing to worry about. Maybe we should worry about the implications of creating a worldwide family tree showing that we really are all related. However, when you think about the possibility of worldwide family tree the reality is that records do not exist to connect every person to every other person on the face of the earth. The genetically, we are certainly all related.

Thursday, February 7, 2019

Why does my DNA Test Ethnicity Change?


This is my original Ancestry.com DNA Test from May of 2017. The summary of the results was as follows:
  • Great Britain 55%
  • Scandinavia 29%
  • The Iberian Peninsula 11%
  • Ireland 5%
Time has passed an I have grown older and now my ethnicity has changed. Here is what the test results show today, for the same test. 


This notice comes up when I go to look at my results:


You might notice that both estimates add up to 100%. Would the earlier results have caused me to start trying to find my "Iberian" ancestors? What do these DNA test results tell me that I didn't already know? More importantly, what kind of changes will I see in my results in another year or two?

Let's think about a little bit of history here. If your ancestors came from England, as mine obviously did from all the research I have done, where did the people who now live in England come from? Why doesn't my ethnicity estimate simply reflect the origin of the people who live in England? If you want a current summary of the historical origins of the English people, here is one article that will give you some pause to accept DNA testing ethnicities on their face value: "Myths of British ancestry." See also this book by the same author as the article:

Oppenheimer, Stephen. 2012. The Origins of the British.

A more fundamental question for genealogists is what does all this have to do with genealogy? I am going to give my own opinion here and say not much if anything. It all falls into the category of so what? 

So what is the real value of DNA testing for genealogists? The answer is not obvious because of the hype over ethnicity results. The real value is in assisting in identifying relatives in the first four to six generations. Past that, it is sales hype. Alright, in some unique cases where extensive genealogical research has been done, you might be able to push an extensive DNA testing study to help identify more remote ancestors, but the real value is much more close to the first few generations. 

The second major point about genealogical DNA testing is that it only makes sense in the context of a carefully and well-researched family tree. If you take a DNA test, you may have an unknown parent or sibling, but unless you do more and have access to and connect with a database of others with the same test, you will never know. 

Have you looked at the results of your DNA test lately? Have the results changed from the original estimates? Isn't this estimate sort of like the weather forecasters modifying their predictions after rain or snow has started falling? Were you told that your "estimate" would change over time?

Should you take a DNA test? Yes, if you want to do so. But how about participating in genealogical research also and put your family tree online so you and others can see who you are and who you are related to. After all, we are all family. 

Tuesday, February 5, 2019

Google's Shutdown of Google+

https://support.google.com/plus/answer/9217723?hl=en
Google has announced that Google+ will shut down in April 2019. However, I am presently not able to easily post my blogs or anything else to the website. If you have been following my blogs on Google+, I suggest that you now follow or at least like my Facebook page for Genealogy's Star where I will be posting links to all of my various blog posts. Also, see @Genealogysstar.

https://www.facebook.com/Genealogysstar/?ref=bookmarks
If you have some kind of aversion to Facebook, then you could subscribe with FeedBurner or by email. There are links to subscribe located in the information on the right-hand sidebar of my posts.



You can follow my blog, Rejoice, and be exceeding glad..., by following my Facebook page or by email with the link in the sidebar. My third blog, WalkingArizona,  also has a link to follow the blog in the sidebar.

Monday, February 4, 2019

What can you learn from taking a DNA test?


The real answer to the question in the title of this post is it depends. But commonly, the answer is absolutely nothing. For example, telling me that I am 74% English is not surprising and after doing genealogical research for 38 years it is hardly new information. But before you start to respond with a list of all the things you learned from your own DNA test, hear me out.

A DNA test taken in isolation from its context is only useful when placed in the context with the purpose for which it was taken. If you take a DNA test for medical reasons, the test only becomes valuable when it is analyzed and interpreted in light of current medical research. If you take a DNA test for forensic reasons, it is only useful in the context of some type of legal action. If you take a DNA test to support genealogical research conclusions it is only useful if you have done careful and complete genealogical research. A more simple example is taking a DNA test from a genealogical database company. In that context, the results of your test are only useful if your test is compared to that of many other people taking the same test. In other words, the value of the DNA test is in the accuracy of the DNA matches. In my case, I have not learned anything that I did not already know.

If you start reading the flood of commentary on DNA testing, you will soon see that most of the comments relate to "discoveries"  that are made as a result of a DNA test taken in conjunction with a database of other people who have taken the same test. So far, the DNA tests that I've taken have matched me with a very small number of people who are classified as extended family. My own case, the number of people in this category is 11. Of those people, six do not have a family tree in the website providing the DNA test and since these people are living none of them appear in my family research. In short, I have no idea who these people are. So the fact that I am related to someone named "Sarah" is absolutely useless information to me. Granted, I could contact that person through the program but if she does not have a family tree how will she know how she is related to me?

In short, a DNA test is only valuable and only provides information if it is placed in the context of the research that it is intended to support. Again returning to the online stories about DNA testing, many of them relate how someone is surprised or even overwhelmed by learning that they have a certain ethnicity. But it is seldom emphasized that this conclusion comes only as a result of the DNA testing company having matched the results of the individual's DNA test to hundreds or thousands or even millions of other people taking the same test. But even with a database of millions of people, the DNA testing company will need to do careful research matching certain DNA sequences to people in a certain geographic area. If you took a DNA test some time ago, you have likely found that the results of your test have changed over time. This happens as a result of the DNA testing companies refining the results of the DNA tests as more and more tests are taken. So what happens if you based your actions or impressions on your initial test results received a year or two ago? Are you prepared to reassess your original impressions every time the DNA company refines and changes the percentages of ethnicity reported?

Another interesting fact is that despite the thousands of DNA matches I have received and continue to receive notice of, I have yet to have anyone contact me for genealogical information simply because of the DNA testing match. In those few cases when a person who has an extensive family tree matches to my DNA test, I almost certainly have already been notified through tree matching technology of that particular relationship. Granted, DNA testing may help to confirm that we both have fairly accurate research but without the extensive family tree research that preceded the test, the information would be essentially useless.

Hypothetical situation. But suppose that you were adopted and that you did not know either your birth mother for birth father. Let's further suppose that you take a popular DNA test. Will taking that test help you identify your birthparents? The answer is simple. Test results will only identify your birth parents if someone who is related to you, either your birthparents or another close relative, takes the same DNA test. So in that situation, if you were truly trying to find your birth parents, you would take every single test available. Doing so would increase the chances that one of your relatives had taken the same test. Granted, there are likely people out there who have done that, i.e. taken a series of DNA tests. But the companies who report the stories of people finding their relatives usually do not mention the fact that the person may have taken more than one DNA test.

The current DNA technology certainly increases the possibility that an orphan will find his or her birth parents or some other close relative. But it is my impression that reports of confirming extensive genealogical research conclusions only occurs when the people involved have been doing genealogical research extensively for many years. Meanwhile, what motivation do I have to contact Sarah who is a first cousin twice removed or fourth cousin who does not have a family tree?

Sunday, February 3, 2019

What will you lose if a website goes down?


This prominent notice should remind all of us of the ephemeral nature of online websites. Of course, Google+ is not a website I would ever have considered useful for storing any type of information, I am certain that there are a number of people who have posted photos or other information on the website that they would like to have preserved. We often get into a discussion about the relative merits of the different methods of backing out computerized data but the real issue is permanence.

If we rely on mechanical devices we can basically predict that they will fail after a certain period of usage. In this case, redundancy is the rule. For that reason, I use multiple external hard drives for backing up most of my information. However, it is shortsighted to use mechanical and or flash memory devices exclusively. Given the low cost of online storage, it is always a good idea to employ redundancy in this regard also. Some online websites that purport to be backup solutions are really only useful for temporary storage of documents which may need to be used on different devices. Other online data storage websites are best suited merely for the purpose of transferring files and allowing multiple individuals to work on files at the same time.

I would suggest, that just as we can predict that the mechanical device will inevitably fail, we can also predict that any one particular storage solution that is entirely online may also fail.

Do your homework! Before relying on online storage make sure that you have considered all of the options.

Saturday, February 2, 2019

How do the large online genealogy websites compare?

From time to time, I return to the question of comparing the four largest online "genealogy" database websites. One main reason for this comparison is the fact that I find that genealogical researchers tend to become "fans" of one or two of the websites and ignore the other websites entirely. This is true in the United States with some people who use one website and are seemingly unaware of the existence of the others. When I am in a discussion with these people about a particular genealogical question and I mention that they would benefit from using another website, I am frequently faced with a response that they "see no need to consider using the other website."

The almost constant background reaction to the online websites extends well beyond just comparing the top four. I am constantly surprised that would-be genealogists have so little knowledge of what I would consider to be basic genealogical concepts and online website tools for research. Genealogy is not a sport where we choose our team and become partisans. Making these arbitrary choices based on "product loyalty" or other emotional baggage is simply inappropriate. (I would use the word stupid, but some people don't care for the word being used). Am I a partisan? I use every website I can find that might help me in any way to find the information I am looking for.

Why then would I take the time to "compare" the large online genealogy websites? My motivation exists at several levels. First of all, there is the question of advertising. Three of the four largest genealogical database websites are commercial operations. One of them, FamilySearch.org, is a non-profit, free, website. However, all four of them advertise and make claims about the desirability of their "products." But as I have written and said many times, the size of the largest database in the world is not large enough if it doesn't have the information you are looking for. This one concept explains why I attempt to make researchers aware of the need to use every tool (i.e. website) available.

What about cost? Hmm. I have written about this issue for years. I am writing this post on a weekend when a large popular sporting event is taking place in the United States involving a very popular sport. I live minutes away from a major university that has a very popular sports team. What if I wanted to attend a football game in the stadium that is just down the street from me? How much would that cost? Well, first of all, they have twenty different levels of ticket prices based on how much you have donated to the football team in the past. I would be in the lowest level of ticket priority and would have to wait until all of the other categories of potential ticket purchasers had made their choices. Historical ticket prices for a season ticket run from $120 to $500 a year, if you can find a place to sit that hasn't already been purchased. Football tickets in Provo are cheap compared to season ski lift ticket in Utah. A weekday adult ski pass one person runs from $45 a DAY to $169.00. OK, what's the point. The point is that people are willing to pay huge amounts of money for those things they value. Genealogy is cheap. I could pay for an entire year's subscription to all three of the subscription websites for the cost of 3 or 4 days skiing.

What is the answer? Hmm again. By the way, all four of these websites are freely accessible in the over 5000 FamilySearch Family History Centers around the world.

Enough of that issue.

Is there any other useful way to compare the four websites? The key here is my statement above. If the website doesn't have what you are looking for then it has little value. But how do you know if the website has what you are looking for without looking? That is the question and that is the question you should be asking about every genealogical resource. Can you afford to ignore a website such as MyHeritage.com with a current claim to 9.5 billion fully indexed historical records? Granted, comparing numbers and statistics is really comparing apples and oranges. But let's suppose you are looking for relatives and not just searching for names in a database. How do you go about finding living people you are related to? Here numbers help. Returning to MyHeritage.com again. Let's think about how we find people and how we might find people we are related to. I am guessing that this is one of the main motivations for taking a DNA test. But how do we find relatives otherwise?

One traditional way to find our relatives was to search through phone directories for people with the same surname. I have heard countless stories of people who have gone to a particular location and spent time telephoning people with the same surname found in a telephone book. But what if you had a website that was connected to 100 million living users around the world who were interested in finding their relatives? What if that same website actively attempted to connect to with all of your relatives? Further, what if you came from a place where there were very few available genealogical records? What would be the value of contacting your relatives? Especially those who lived in the countries where there were no records? This is the exact basis for the website called MyHeritage.com. In addition to having billions of records, the website has over 100 million users in every country of the world and actively tries to connect you with those to whom you are related. See, it is not possible to compare the large online genealogy websites. Each of them is a unique tool and each of them should be carefully considered as a source of genealogical information.

As genealogists, whatever our excuses may be, we cannot afford to ignore the vast amount of information that is accumulating online. It baffles me when I talk to people who are ignoring one of the four large websites and are still expressing frustration at not being able to find records that pertain to their family. How do you know if they have the records or not?

A final note, there are a number of specific reasons for using each of the four large websites. You may have made an evaluation in the past of the utility of one or more of the websites. However, time is passed and each of the websites has increased dramatically in size and capability. Genealogical research is an ongoing project and we need to take advantage of all of the resources that are becoming available. It's time to go back and check again.

Friday, February 1, 2019

A Step-by-Step Approach to Using Genealogical Cluster Research: Step One


Most genealogists, as they gain experience in doing research, evolve a methodology that reflects their own personal background. If you were influenced by traditional "paper-based" genealogy, then your personal methodology will usually rely on those techniques and methods you witnesses while working with your contemporaries. In genealogical terminology, a "cluster" consists of extended family members, friends, neighbors, and other associates such as business partners. Using the term expansively, a cluster could include anyone who would possibly come in contact with the person who is the target of your research. Cluster research is a research technique or methodology that is supplemented by "jurisdictional research" and utilizes the concept of beginning your research in the lowest or basic jurisdictional level. An early exposition on jurisdictional research was described in the following book.

Jones, Vincent L., Arlene H. Eakle, and Mildred H. Christensen. 1972. Genealogical research; a jurisdictional approach. [Salt Lake City]: [Printed by Publishers Press for Genealogical Copy Service, Woods Cross, Utah].

This book was later revised and published as follows:

Jones, Vincent L., Arlene H. Eakle, and Mildred H. Christensen. 1972. Family history for fun and profit. Provo, Utah: Printed by Community Press for the Genealogical Institute.

I have yet to figure of the profit part of genealogy and I am also skeptical about the "fun" part either. I assume the title was changed in an attempt to increase sales of the book.

The idea of focusing on cluster research is essentially the same as researching in the "home jurisdiction" as the term is used in the books cited above. Jurisdictional research expands on the idea of focusing on clusters and expands research outward using both geographically and politically defined areas. But it is important to understand the need to expand your current research methodology to include the target family's or person's relational surroundings.

By the way, most books on genealogy will never really go "out-of-date." The exceptions, of course, are those that focus on technology. Even though the two books listed above (really essentially the same book) were published in 1972, now nearly 50 years ago, all of the principles laid down in the books are still valid and useful.

The currently popular emphasis on the technological aspects of genealogical research, including, but not limited to DNA testing, has almost completely overshadowed the need to understand the valuable concepts developed over time by more traditional genealogists. That is not to say, that all of the methodologies developed by traditional genealogists are presently applicable. Computerization has dramatically affected most of the ways that the traditional genealogical community gathered, stored, and reported their genealogical research.

Traditionally, the research project was visualized as a circle. However, I believe that the circle metaphor is limited. A better representation would be a web. In order to understand how to implement cluster research, it is important to place close to research in the context of general historical or genealogical research. In describing the research process, depending on your proclivities, you could use from a few too many discrete steps. Despite the fact, that I can list discrete steps in a research process, I almost never follow this pattern. Research is organic. Every time you find a document or review what has already been discovered the objectives of your research change. However notwithstanding the fluid nature of research, here is my own simplification of the process:

1. The first stage of research is generally referred to as the survey stage. In a real sense, the survey stage is a continuous process because, in the technological environment that presently exists, there is no end to the amount of information developed by others in the genealogical community usually represented by additions to online family trees. Consequently, reviewing what has been done previously or recorded previously can almost overwhelm all of the other aspects of the genealogical process. 
2. As you proceed through the survey stage, hopefully, you will accumulate some information about your family that enables you to identify documents or records that may contain information about your family. The process of identifying records and documents and then subsequently discovering where they might be located is really the most time-consuming part of genealogical research. 
3. Once you have located documents as records which may contain information about your target family or individual, you must review the documents and records and extract the information and add it to whatever method you are using to record genealogical information. At this stage, it is also really important to review how any information obtained affects any other information and conclusions which you have already made. 
4. Once you have a corpus of information you must constantly review what you have already concluded and revise any conclusions based on the acquisition of additional information obtained through records and documents.
Inexperienced genealogists almost always focus on names rather than on the overall historical context of the individuals and families they are researching.  cluster research should not be thought of as a new way to do genealogy, it is merely an extension of whatever methodology you may have already adopted. It does, however, require that you become more aware of the historical context of each of the events in your target family or individual's life. Subsequently, I am not replacing any of the discrete steps in genealogical research however they may be defined, I am intending to augment those steps in a way that increases the possibility of finding the information being sought.

At its most basic level, the first step in implementing cluster research is to become aware of the historical setting and surroundings of the target family or ancestor. In this context, I am using the term "target" in the sense that the researcher will choose a particular family or individual to research. Of course, as I mentioned already, the target family or individual will evolve and change as you work through the research. It is entirely possible, but you will find out that you are not related to your target family or individual and abandon the research altogether.

Let's suppose that you were going to research a person such as Eliza Ann Hamilton. Let's further suppose that you had done some preliminary survey of the existing information and found that family tradition said that she was born and Kentucky in the early 1800s. Using today's technology, it would seem to be indicated to simply go online and begin searching in a large online genealogical database for an Eliza Ann Hamilton in Kentucky in the early 1800s. A search for that name on the FamilySearch.org website in the Historical Records Collections using a birthday range from 1800 to 1830 and a place of Kentucky will produce 4,262 results. It should be obvious at this point that searching for a name without a sufficient amount of context information is unproductive.

In order to move beyond the "search for a name" stage, it is necessary to add additional contextual information even if we want to utilize online search engines. So it is important to put the person into their historical context and utilize all known information about the family even if you are focusing on an online search.