ACM Home Page
Please provide us with feedback. Feedback
Supporting collaborative interpretation in distributed Groupware
Full text PdfPdf (501 KB)
Source Computer Supported Cooperative Work archive
Proceedings of the 2000 ACM conference on Computer supported cooperative work table of contents
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, United States
Pages: 289 - 298  
Year of Publication: 2000
ISBN:1-58113-222-0
Authors
Donald Cox  IBM Software Solutions, Toronto Laboratory, Toronto, Ontario, M3C 1H7 Canada
Saul Greenberg  Department of Computer Science, University of Calgary, Calgary, Alberta, T2N 1N4, Canada
Sponsors
SIGGROUP: ACM Special Interest Group on Supporting Group Work
SIGCHI: ACM Special Interest Group on Computer-Human Interaction
Publisher
ACM  New York, NY, USA
Bibliometrics
Downloads (6 Weeks): 11,   Downloads (12 Months): 81,   Citation Count: 14
Additional Information:

abstract   references   cited by   index terms   collaborative colleagues  

Tools and Actions: Request Permissions Request Permissions    Review this Article  
DOI Bookmark: Use this link to bookmark this Article: http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/358916.359000
What is a DOI?

ABSTRACT

Collaborative interpretationoccurs when a group interprets and transforms a diverse set of information fragments into a coherent set of meaningful descriptions. This activity is characterized byemergence, where the participants' shared understanding develops gradually as they interact with each other and the source material. Our goal is to support collaborative interpretation by small, distributed groups. To achieve this, we first observed how face-to-face groups perform collaborative interpretation in a particular work context. We then synthesized design principles from two relevant areas: the key behaviors of people engaged in activities where emergence occurs, and how distributed groups work together over visual surfaces. We built and evaluated a system that supports a specific collaborative interpretation task. This system provides a large workspace and several objects that encourages emergence in interpretation. People manipulatecardsthat contain the raw information fragments. They reduce complexity by placing duplicate cards intopiles. They suggest groupings as they manipulate the spatial layout of cards and piles. They enrich spatial layouts throughnotes, textandfreehand annotations. They record their understanding of their final groupings asreportscontaining coherent descriptions.


REFERENCES

Note: OCR errors may be found in this Reference List extracted from the full text article. ACM has opted to expose the complete List rather than only correct and linked references.

 
1
Byrne, J. and Barlow, T. Structured brainstorming: A method for collecting user requirements. Proc. Human Factors and Ergonomics Society 37th Annual Meeting 1, 427-431, 1993
 
2
Clark, H. Using Language. University of Cambridge Press, 1996.
3
 
4
Cox, D. Supporting Results Synthesis in Heuristic Evaluation. M.Sc. thesis, Dept Computer Science, University of Calgary, Calgary, AB Canada, 1998.
 
5
6
7
 
8
9
 
10
 
11
12
13
 
14
15
16
17
 
18
Munemori, J. and Nagasawa, Y. GUNGEN: Groupware for a new idea generation support system. Information and Software Technology. 38, 213-220, 1996.
 
19
20
21
 
22
Shipman, F.M., and Marshall, C.C. Formality considered harmful: Experiences, emerging themes, and directions. Xerox PARC Report ISTL-CSA-94-08-02, 1994.
 
23

CITED BY  14

Collaborative Colleagues:
Donald Cox: colleagues
Saul Greenberg: colleagues