O SlideShare utiliza cookies para otimizar a funcionalidade e o desempenho do site, assim como para apresentar publicidade mais relevante aos nossos usuários. Se você continuar a navegar o site, você aceita o uso de cookies. Leia nosso Contrato do Usuário e nossa Política de Privacidade.
O SlideShare utiliza cookies para otimizar a funcionalidade e o desempenho do site, assim como para apresentar publicidade mais relevante aos nossos usuários. Se você continuar a utilizar o site, você aceita o uso de cookies. Leia nossa Política de Privacidade e nosso Contrato do Usuário para obter mais detalhes.
MODELS – CSCW MATRIXTime x Space [Ellis 91] Time x Space x Previsibility [Grudin 94] Time x Space x Group size [Nunamaker 91]
MODELS 3C Collaboration model Prisioner’s dilemma 3C Collaboration model
BEYOND BEING THERE A seminal paper by Hollan and Stornetta [Holland and Stornetta 91] Question: “(…) those at a distance will be at no real disadvantage to those colocated?” Not about the quality, but about the imitation of the ‘being there’ felling Analogy: crutches (broken leg) x shoes (enhance performance) Other characteristics: anonymity, semisynchronous discussions, feedback, archiving, and others
DESINING – WHY CSCW APPS FAIL? [Grudin 88] discussed problems in the design and evalution of organizational interfaces: Disparity among user’s benefits and extra work Problems with intuitive decision-making (managers) Underestimating dificulty of evaluting CSCW applications
DESINING – COMMONCHARACTERISTICS Synchronous CSCW has some well-know and common characteristics [Ellis et al. 89]: Short response times Real-time notifications Distributed environment Volatile participation Ad hoc information access High degree of access conflicts Connection by external channel (audio or video)
DESINING CSCW – 8 CHALLENGES [Grudin 94] list 8 challenges for CSCW developers: 1. Disparity in work and benefit 2. Critical mass and the Prisioner’s dilemma problems 3. Disruption of social processes 4. Exception handling 5. Unobtrusive accessibility 6. Difficulty in evaluation 7. Failure of intuition 8. The adoption process
DESINING CSCW – APPROCHES Ad hoc implementation Toolkits [Greenberg & Roseman 98] Component-based approches [Begole et al. 99] Collaboration Transparent Systems (CTS) Screen sharing – 1º generation [MS NetMeeting] Intelligent Collaboration Transparency (ICT) and ICT 2 – 2º generation [Li & Li 2002] Transparent Adaptation (T.A.) [Xia et al. 2004] Mapping of Components [Pichiliani & Hirata 2006]
AWARENESS – EARLY STUDIES [Heath & Luff 92] studied the coordination of activities of London Control Rooms (trains) Two actors: Line controller’s and DIA Seat side by side without direct communication Awareness by indirect interation: listen to conversations, gaze direction, monitoring displays, and indirect cues Implicit actions to coordinate the tasks: unobtrusive awareness Many implications for the design of CSCW applications Social focus on communication and coordination
AWARENESS – SHARED WORKSPACES Awareness: “(…) understanding of the activities of others, which provides a context for your own activity.” [Dourish & Bellotti 92] Argue that the user must not explicit provide awareness information Focus on synchronous collaborative writing systems (ShrEdit) Shared feedback: Information about individual activities by presenting feedback on operations within the shared workspace [Greenberg et al. 96]
AWARENESS – WIDGETS (1) a) Telecarets b) Telepointers c) Multi-user scrollbars [Telecarets] [Telepointers] [MUS]d) RadarView [Radar] e) Read and Write Shadows f) FishEyeView [RWS] [FishE]
AWARENESS – WIDGETS (2) DragMag View [DMG] Two-level view [TLV] Audio cues [Gaver 91], [Kansas 2008] Widgets x Focus of attention Few studies about gaze awareness in CSCW. Example: [Vertegal & Ding 2002]
AWARENESS – TELEEYE MOO [Pichiliani et al. 2008]: Two users wearing the MOO eye Tracker Hardware User’s A Workspace User’s B WorkspaceIris detection application
ARCHITECTURES “The architecture of a collaborative application is characterized by the modules, layers, replicas, threads, and processes into which the application is decomposed; the awareness in these components of collaboration functions; and the interaction among these components.” [Dewan 99] Decomposition of the system into components Synchronous, Assynchronous, Multi-synchronous and Quasi-synchronous WYSIWIS x relaxed WYSIWIS x WYSIWYG Many architectural models
ARCHITECTURES – EXAMPLES PAC* architectural model [Galvary 97] Clover architectural model [Laurillau 2002] Generic Collaborationarchitecture [Dewan 95]
ARCHITECTURES – DISTRIBUTION Distributed system aspects in the architecture for synchronous groupware [Phillips 99]: Centralized: “(…)application on a single server and only the display services are found at the users’ sites.” Replicated: “(…) all data and computation is replicated at all sites” Semi-replicated: “(…) some aspects of computation and state are replicated while others are centralized.” Flexible: “(…) adjust the run time distribution architecture to suit application needs.” Many variations of these basic distribution architectures
ARCHITECTURES – MVC ACHITECTURES A classification of architectures in the MVC architectural style [Suthers 2001]: Centralized architecture Replicated architecture Distributed architecture Hybrid architecture
CONCLUSIONS Collaboration models help the design from the theoretical point of view Designers must provide more than the immitation of face to face meetings Design of synchronous applications have many challenges (and opportunities) Awareness is a central focus for communication, coordination and cooperation Different approches for developer synchronous CSCW applications Architectures help organize and distribute the components
REFERENCES – ITA CSCW [Pichiliani & Hirata 2006] Pichiliani, Mauro C., Hirata, Celso M. A Guide to map application components to support multi-user real-time collaboration. Second International Conference on Collaborative Computing: Networking, Applications and Worksharing (CollaborateCom 2006), Georgia, Atlanta, EUA, Novembro de 2006. [Pichiliani & Hirata 2007] Pichiliani, Mauro C., Hirata, Celso M. Multi-Level Locks to Control Collaborative Modeling Sessions. Third International Conference on Collaborative Computing: Networking, Applications and Worksharing (CollaborateCom 2007), White Plains, New York, EUA, Novembro de 2007. [Pichiliani et al. 2008] Pichiliani, Mauro C., Hirata, Celso M., Soares, Fabricio S., Forster, Carlos H. Q. TeleEye: an Awareness Widget for providing the Focus of Attention in Collaborative Editing Systems. Forth International Conference on Collaborative Computing: Networking, Applications and Worksharing (CollaborateCom 2008), Orlando, Florida, EUA, Novembro de 2008. [Pichiliani & Hirata 2009] Pichiliani, Mauro C., Hirata, Celso M. A Technical Comparison of the Existing Approaches to Support Collaboration in Non-Collaborative Applications. Proceedings of the 2009 International Symposium on Collaborative Technologies and Systems (CTS 2009), Baltimore, Maryland, EUA, Maio de 2009, pp. 314-321. [Berkenbrock et al. 2009] Berkenbrock, Carla D. M., Hirata, Celso M. , Fernandes, Clovis T., Pichiliani, Mauro C. Requisitos de Usabilidade para o Desenvolvimento e Avaliação de Aplicações Cooperativas Móveis. Artigo publicado no VI Simpósio Brasileiro de Sistemas Colaborativos (SBSC), pp.10-18, Fortaleza, Outubro de 2009. [Pichiliani & Hirata 2009] Pichiliani, Mauro C., Hirata, Celso M., A Digital Ink Sketch-Based Application for Collaborative Design and Kinematic Simulation. Artigo publicado no VI Simpósio Brasileiro de Sistemas Colaborativos (SBSC), pp. 1-9, Fortaleza, Outubro de 2009. [Pichiliani & Hirata 2009] Pichiliani, Mauro C., Hirata, Celso M. A Tabletop Groupware System for Computer-based Music Composition. Fifth International Conference on Collaborative Computing: Networking, Applications and Worksharing (CollaborateCom 2009), Washington D. C., EUA, Novembro de 2009. [Berkenbrock et al. 2010] Berkenbrock, C., Silva, A. P. C., Hirata C. M., Fernandes, C., Pichiliani, M.C. Investigando o Anonimato de Usuários num Ambiente Colocalizado utilizando um Groupware Móvel. Artigo publicado no VII Simpósio Brasileiro de Sistemas Colaborativos (SBSC), Minas Gerais, Outubro de 2010.
REFERENCES – GENERAL (1) [Begole et al. 99] Begole, J. C. A., Rosson, M. B., Shaffer, C. A.: Flexible collaboration transparency: supporting worker independence in replicated application sharing systems. ACM Transactions on Computer-Human Interaction 6, pp. 95-132 (1999) [Ellis et al. 89] ELLIS, Clarence; GIBBS, S. J. Concurrency control in groupware system. In: Proceedings of the 1989 ACM SIGMOD International Conference on Management of data (SIGMOD89), San Diego, Califórnia, E.U.A., p.399-407, 1989. [Ellis 91] ] ELLIS, Clarence; GIBBS, S. J; REIN, G. L. Groupware: some issues and experiences. Communications of the ACM, v.34, n.1, p.38-58, jan., 1991. [Dewan 95] DEWAN, Prasun. Multiuser architectures. In: Proceedings of the IFIP TC2/WG2.7 Working Conference on Engineering for Human-Computer Interaction, p.247-270, 1995. [Dewan 99] Dewan, P. . Computer Supported Co-Operative Work. 1, ed. Nova York: John Wiley & Sons, 1999. Chapter 7 [DMG] Gutwin, C., Greenberg, S.: Focus and Awareness in Groupware. In: Video Proceedings of the 7th ACM Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work, Washington, U.S.A. (1998) [FishE] Greenberg, S., Gutwin, C., Cockburn, A.: Awareness Through Fisheye Views in Relaxed-WYSIWIS Groupware. In: Proceedings of the 1996 Graphics Interface, pp. 28-38, Toronto, Canada (1996) [Galvary 97] CALVARY, Gaëlle; COUTAZ Joëlle; NIGAY, Laurence. From single-user architectural design to PAC*: A generic software architecture model for CSCW. In: Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human factors in computing systems, p.242-249, 1997. [Gaver 91] Gaver, W. W.: Sound Support for Collaboration. In: Proceedings of the 2nd European Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work, pp. 293-308, Amsterdam, Netherlands (1991) [Greenberg & Roseman 98] Greenberg, S., Roseman, M.: Groupware Toolkits for Synchronous Work. John Wiley & Sons, New York (1998) [Grudin 88] Grudin, J. Why CSCW applications fail: Problems in the design and evaluation of organizational interfaces. 1988. Proc. CSCW 88, 31, 85-93. [Grudin 94] GRUDIN, Jonhatan. Computer Supported Collaborative Work: History and Focus, IEEE Computer, vol.27, n.5, p.19-26, 1994.
REFERENCES – GENERAL (3) [Telecarets] Greenberg, S., Marwood, D.: Real Time Groupware as a Distributed System: Concurrency Control and its Effect on the Interface. In: Proceedings of the 5th ACM Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work, pp. 207-217, North Caroline, U.S.A (1994) [Telepointers] Greenberg, S., Gutwin, C., Roseman, M.: Semantic Telepointers for Groupware. In: Proceedings of the 6th Australian Conference on Computer-Human Interaction, pp. 24-27, Hamilton, New Zealand (1996) [Vertegal & Ding 2002] Vertegaal, R., Ding, Y.: Explaining Effects of Eye Gaze on Mediated Group Conversations: Amount or Synchronization? In: Proceedings of the 9th ACM Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work, pp. 41-48, Louisiana, U.S.A. (2002) [TLV] Greenberg, S., Roseman, M.: Groupware Toolkits for Synchronous Work. John Wiley & Sons, New York (1998) [Xia et al. 2004] Xia, S., Sun, D., Sun, C., Chen, D., Shen, H.: “Leveraging single-user applications for multi-user collaboration: the CoWord approach. In: Proceedings of 9th ACM CSCW Conference. Chicago, USA, pp. 162-171 (2004)