Date post: | 31-Dec-2015 |
Category: |
Documents |
Upload: | axel-brock |
View: | 25 times |
Download: | 0 times |
Lightweight Collaboration
Lisa M. Smith
Michelle Chang
Pratik Dave
CPSC 672 Topic 4 Presentation
Lightweight Collaboration
lightweight
– “without much user involvement” [dourish and bly, 1992]
lightweight communication
– impromptu
– quick/easy to initiate
– short/informal
– multiple/distinct occurrences lightweight interaction
– two-way (dyadic)
example systems & issues
– dyadic
• Montage 1994, Sunsoft
• TeleNotes 1997, Lotus Development Corporation
– distributed work groups
• Portholes 1992, Xerox EuroPARC/PARC
– multiple users
• CWB 2002, Mitsubishi Electric Research Laboratories
Lightweight Collaboration: systems and issues
dyadic– Montage [tang et al.]
• hallway metaphor
• lightweight audio/video glances
• accessibility modes
– do not disturb, locked, out of office, other
• 3-way support
• results
– similar to face-to-face or phone
– provide awareness
– TeleNotes [whittaker et al.]• presentation metaphor• stack of stickies per topic
– Notes database• lightweight features
– conversational threading, one-way drop, quick connection, context preservation and regeneration, shared objects
• results– quicker to start, “quickfire”
exchanges, personal reminding and notes for others
Lightweight Collaboration: systems and issues (cont.)
distributed work groups– Portholes [dourish and bly]
• joint management of distributed data space by cooperating servers
• iterative design/development/use
• broadcast mode
– all users have access to all information
• results
– shared awareness
– “sense of community”
multiple users– CWB: Collaborative Web
Browsing [esenther]
• multiple users synchronize views of web pages while talking on phone
• “one-click collaboration”
– shared pointer
• results
– ‘casual collaboration’ between arbitrary users
– unobtrusive
– avoids pre-collaboration and trust requirements
Awareness
awareness– gives daily view of work
environment• who’s around?• what activities are going on?• who’s talking to whom?
– helps maintain relationships• informal interactions• spontaneous connections• development of shared
cultures– co-located groups– distributed groups at multiple
sites
issues
– how awareness information affects/supports collaborative work?
– what awareness information is meaningful and how to provide it?
– how to effectively present useful awareness information in user interface design?
further information/overview
– see [liechti, 2000]
Peripheral Awareness
peripheral awareness– systems providing awareness
information via software residing in user’s peripheral attention
– how systems present information without requiring focus of attention
• calm technology (Weiser and Brown)
– “move easily from the periphery of our attention, to the center, and back”
– Natalie Jeremijenko’s “Dangling String”
example system– Sideshow [cadiz et al, 2002] ,
Microsoft Research
• internet or intranet information; screen real estate; launch point for accessible (further) information
• tickets on side bar of primary display
• results
– “stay aware of important information without switching away from primary task”
Situational Awareness
situational awareness– also referred to as peripheral
awareness
– continually monitoring variety of inputs (auditory, visual, tactile), instantly shifting attention if required
– safety or time critical systems
example
– air traffic control ethnographic studies: role of paper flight strips
• [mackay, 1999], University of Aarhus
• this is a “honed skill”: passive and active
– unobstrusively monitor evolving situation
– process multiple threads
– extract information as needed
• off-duty team members “chatting”
• students must gradually learn
Situational Awareness:research
framework for cooperative problem solving
– airline operations [mccoy et al.],
– situation
• real-time information
• background knowledge
– cooperation (knowledge needed for decision-making)
• shared understanding of local situations
• interpersonal bonds (trust)
– results:
• level of detail needed to maintain situational awareness varies on circumstances
safety or time critical systems, further information
– military • see [kruse, 2000], University of
Arizona
– emergency service work (CAD) • see [pettersson et al., 2002],
Sweden, Manchester Metropolitan University
Mobile Ad hoc Collaboration
Mobile Ad hoc Collaboration
Spans geographic separation and time Challenges:
1. Poor Wireless bandwidth networks
2. Out of service area
3. Pre-defined group doesn’t exist
4. Creating an active seamless link
5. Other user already engaged or mobile device switched off
Hocman Mattias Esbjornsson and Mattias OstergrenMobility, Interactive Institute, Stockholm Sweden Ad hoc collaboration among motorcyclists HTTP peer to peer application Share audio, images, HTML documents on a
handheld device Maintains profiles of motorcyclists in the
vicinity
RoamWare
Mikael Wiberg, Umea University, Sweden Seamless interaction in between mobile meetings 3 components: Desktop, PDA, Radio
1. PDA : records meeting interactions, times, participants
2. Radio: finds names & emails of all participants in the vicinity
3. Desktop: allows user to sync and refine notes on office PC.
Call-Kiosk
Thomas Rst, Patrick Brandmeier, Gerd Herzog, Elisabeth Andre, German Research Center for AI, Germany
Simulates the function of a tourist office Information delivered as WML pages
stored on serverClient downloads pages to mobile device
WebSplitter
Richard Han, Veronique Perret, Mahmoud Naghshineh, IBM Thomas J. Watson Research Center, NY
Form of collaborative web browsing
Different access privileges to different parts of the same web page
Creates partial views depending on user login
Uses a server-side XML metadata policy file
Instant Messaging and Chat
General Issues with Instant Messaging
Synchronous/Interactive– immediate context– less likelihood of misunderstandings
Can be used asynchronously– conversation at slower pace throughout
day– flexible for globally/temporally
distributed groups Highly visible alerting mechanism
– higher probability of response– reasonable deniability– stays on screen, low cost for response
Informal/Coordinate social activity– contact with family/friends– useful in scheduling alternate media
contact
Awareness/Socially Translucent Interfaces
– e.g. door with sign versus glass window
– easier to conform to social conventions
– awareness of availability serves as a cue for opportunistic interaction
Lightweight– ease of initial setup
– ease of ongoing interaction
– continual presence
– swift exchanges
– easy to locate colleagues/respond
Large-scale Problems to Adoption:– privacy issues
– critical mass required
Problems with IM/Chat Communication
Lack of Recognition Lack of Intention Indicators
Typing Inefficiency Diminished effectiveness for slower
typists
Lack of status information Lack of context
From: “Alternative Interfaces for Chat” Vronay, Smith, and Drucker (UIST ’99)
Babble
IBM (CHI ’99)– Part of “Loops” project
(“keep me in the loop”)
– See level of participation - social cues
– See history – cues from content
– Social proxy – sense of audience and activity
Flow Chat
Microsoft Research (UIST ’99) Address lack of status and typing
issues User Interface issues (scrolling)
provided less than stellar feedback
Threaded Chat
Microsoft Research (CSCW ’00)
Oriented toward collaborative decision making
User’s pleased with quality of decision, but interface issues (awareness of new messages) problematic
Reach Out
IBM Haifa (CSCW ’02) Addresses issue of peer
support IT & Internet produce
cultural obstacles to knowledge sharing
Newsgroups and mailing lists require active participation versus push technology
IM in the Workplace
Adoption difficulties
– Email and telephone responded to existing needs
– Not a direct replacement for any existing tools
– Most widely-publicized use teenagers gossipping• Seen as water-cooler talk
• Kraut / Informal communications benefits
– Studies show most messages pertinent to work
– Studies show usefulness in distributed workplaces/groups Responds to Rhythms of Work
– Individual patterns of business vary across the day, location, day of week, etc.
– Promotes social understanding across geographically distributed groups
People
Bonnie Nardi (AT&T)
Steve Whittaker (AT&T)
Elizabeth Churchill (FXPAL)
James “Bo” Begole (SUN)
Nicole Yankelovich (SUN)
John Tang (SUN)
Wendy Kellogg (IBM)
Thomas Erickson (IBM)
Sara Bly (Sara Bly Consulting)