Awareness Checklist: Reviewing the Quality of Awareness Support in Collaborative Applications
•Download as PPT, PDF•
1 like•713 views
The document proposes an awareness checklist to help assess the quality of awareness support in collaborative applications. It defines different types of awareness including time/place, geographical space, physical space, virtual space, social space, workspace, and situation awareness. The checklist identifies 77 design elements across 7 categories that can contribute to these awareness types. A correlation matrix maps the relationships between design elements and awareness types. The checklist is intended to help system developers review and improve awareness support in their collaborative applications. A case study demonstrates its use to identify low and high scoring awareness elements in a collaborative system.
![Contents ,[object Object],[object Object],[object Object],[object Object],[object Object]]()
Recommended
More Related Content
Similar to Awareness Checklist: Reviewing the Quality of Awareness Support in Collaborative Applications
Similar to Awareness Checklist: Reviewing the Quality of Awareness Support in Collaborative Applications (20)
Recently uploaded
Recently uploaded (20)
Awareness Checklist: Reviewing the Quality of Awareness Support in Collaborative Applications
- 1. Awareness Checklist: Reviewing the Quality of Awareness Support in Collaborative Applications Pedro Antunes, Claudio Sapateiro, Jos é A. Pino, Valeria Herskovic and Sergio F. Ochoa Department of Informatics of the Faculty of Sciences, University of Lisbon Computer Science Department, Universidad de Chile
- 4. Related Work
- 14. Design elements Individual cognition, distributed cognition, team cognition Externalization 14 Events, actions, resources, critical elements, meaning, future scenarios Internalization 13 Parallel activities, coordinated activities, mutually adjusted activities, loosely coupled, tightly coupled Interdependence 12 Feedback, feedthrough, backchannel feedback Interaction 11 Who, what, where, when, how, task history Task 10 Eye-gaze orientation, body orientation, voice filtering, portholes/peepholes Attention 9 Participants, roles, activities, privileges, group history Membership 8 Private, group, public, data access privileges, concurrency control, floor control, version control, virtual constraints, virtual places, virtual topology, virtual attributes Virtuality 7 Viewports, links, radar views, teleports Navigation 6 Physical constraints, physical places, physical topology, physical attributes Physicality 5 Wandering, visiting, traveling, fixed, mobile, autonomous, independent, embedded, pervasive Mobility 4 Cartesian locations, topological locations, distances, orientation, focus/nimbus Spatiality 3 Synchronous, asynchronous, network connectivity, message delivery, network management Communication 2 Same place, different place, any place, co-located, virtually co-located, remote Accessibility 1 Design elements Design category
- 17. Example of use: COIN
- 18. Awareness Checklist + implementation contributes to realize design element - implementation is detrimental to design requirement
- 19. Awareness Report
- 22. Thank you for your attention
Editor's Notes
- Studies have found awareness to be a very important component of a collaborative system Questionnaires and interviews, logging, etc may be used to assess awareness support, however, they require users. Even though users are probably the best evaluators of a system..
- Quality assurance: extent to which quality is controlled in an organization. Early on, QA was based on inspections, but it evolved through methods such as statistical quality control, six-sigma and total quality management. QA extends not only to traditional industry but also to software, through e.g. cleanroom software engineering and SQFD. Formal technical reviews involve several people in a formal meeting during which a software artifact is presented, discussed, approved. Collaborative systems=technology+humans, concerned with group characteristics, communication, etc. In this setting WA must deal with multiple stakeholders, domains of concern and technology components. Difficult to assess due to complexity, time, cost. 3 existing groupware evaluation methods adapt FTR to collaborative systems: GHE (based on 8 heuristics that codify best practices in collab systems development), GWA (stepping through task sequences to explore possible failures) and KMA (checklist to assess knowledge circulation). However, in these methods, concern with awareness is diluted among many other concerns. Beyond these methods, the other technique found in the literature concerned with awareness, requires significant time and effort to accomplish.
- Map of awareness elements and their relationships Awareness elements, main aspects and types of awareness they support
- Time vs place is a classic categorization? in collaborative systems. This highlights spatial issues and the extent users have to go to to access the group. Studies of media richness and media naturalness show that communication mediated by technology loses several important features such as nonverbal cues, rapid feedback and arousal. In this line of reasoning, the notion of place is fundamental to adapt the medium to the group and task. Spaces provide additional context to places such as physical location, topology and mobility. We may identify five types of space
- Space introduces geographical relationships: physical location, topology, mobility
- Mainly concerns mobility
- For example: virtual meeting rooms e.g. discussion forums, navigation is logical, not spatial
- Final type of space
- Workspace awareness is specialization of broader concept: situation awareness
- Design elements mentioned in previous section that influence or contribute to awareness support, organized into 14 categories
- Relationships between design categories and awareness elements Negatively influences workspace awareness because communication channels tend to be a limiting factor
- Five experts, defined relationships between 77 design elements and awareness categories. They were supplied with strong relationships (=4), and had to add moderate (=2) and weak (=1) relationships. Accumulated correlations with value less than 2 were zeroed. Then normalized, to avoid design categories with more elements to have a higher importance in the overall score, and so the sum is 100%.
- Correlations for each design element: strong positive, positive, uncorrelated, negative, strong negative Positive means implementation contributes to realize the design element, negative means implementation is detrimental to design requirement Each score (2,1,-1,-2) is multiplied by correlation in correlations matrix for the awareness category Then adding results, normalizing to a 0-100 scale, separately for positive and negative factors.
- In each category, best outcome is 100 positive and 0 negative scores
- Raise developers attention to understand if that type of awareness is required and how to better support it. Physical awareness: mobility and location play an important role but are not adequately supported
- Developer is not forced to require all the design elements