Download History

CSCW – Computer Supported
Collaborative Work
Using computers & communications to
facilitate work by more than one
person
This material has been developed by Georgia Tech HCI faculty, and continues to
evolve. Contributors include Gregory Abowd, Keith Edwards, Jim Foley, Beki
Grinter, Elizabeth Mynatt, Jeff Pierce, Colin Potts, and John Stasko. Comments
directed to [email protected] are encouraged. Material also is used, with
permission, from James Landay. Permission is granted to use this material, with
acknowledgement, for non-profit purposes. Last revision: December 2005.
1
Outline
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Definitions of CSCW and Groupware
Groupware Technologies
Styles of CSCW
Groupware Implementation Issues
Human Issues in CSCW
Impact of Media Types in CSCW
Evaluating Groupware
Successes and Failures of Groupware
2
CSCW – Definition
• CSCW = The use of computers (and
communications) to support groups of
people in doing their work
• Research area – study how people work
together as a group (using the
technology) and the effects of the
technology on that work
 Includes individual, group and organizational
effects
3
CSCW – Examples
•
•
•
•
Scientists collaborating on a technical issue
Authors editing a document together
Programmers debugging a system concurrently
Workers collaborating over a shared video
conferencing application
• Buyers and sellers meeting on eBay
• Two ways to collaborate
 At the same time (synchronously)
 At different times (asynchronously)
4
Groupware - Definition
• Groupware = the computer and communications
technologies that people use to work together
 Groupware enables CSCW
• Goal is to design groupware to support the
social processes of work, often among
geographically separated people, to make work
more effective than without the technology
 Requires understanding the social processes of work!!
5
Styles of CSCW
Same
(Synchronous)
Time
Different
(Asynchronous)
Same
Place
Different
6
Styles of CSCW with Examples
How do italic
entries differ
from other
entries?
Co-located
Place
Remote
Same
(Synchronous)
Time
Face-to-face meeting
classroom
E-meeting room
Different
(Asynchronous)
Post-it note
Schedule board
In/out board
Argument. tool
Phone, hand signals
Letter, telegram
Video conferencing
Email
7
Styles of CSCW + Groupware to
Support
8
Groupware Technologies
Styles of Systems
1. Computer-mediated communication aids
2. Meeting and decision support systems
3. Shared applications and tools
4. Games
5. Education
6. Communications
7. Awareness
9
Computer-mediated
Communication Aids
• Examples
 Email, Chats, MUDs, virtual worlds, desktop
videoconferencing
 Example: CUSee-Me
10
Meeting and Decision Support
Systems
• Examples
 Corporate decision-support conference room
– Provides ways of rationalizing decisions, voting,
presenting cases, etc.
– Concurrency control is important
 Shared computer classroom/cluster
– Group discussion/design aid tools
11
Shared Applications and Tools
• Examples
 Shared editors, design tools, etc.
– Want to avoid “locking” and allow multiple people
to concurrently work on document
– Requires some form of contention resolution
– How do you show what others are doing?
12
Example - TeamRooms
• Teamrooms - Univ. of Calgary, Saul
Greenberg
Video, CHI ‘97
13
TeamRooms
Example - CoWeb
15
CoWeb – Features to support collaboration
16
CoWeb – Handling Contention
• No locking
 On the Web, how do you know if someone walks away?
• But if person A edits, then person B starts and saves
edit before A saves, how do you deal with it?
 One way: A “wins,” but B’s is available in history for retrieval
 Another way:
– Each edit time is recorded
– If incoming edit time is earlier than last save, then note collision.
Provide user with both versions for resolution.
17
CoWeb – Security
• Save everything,
• But it’s mostly
social pressure
that keeps it
working
18
Roomware: Second Generation
• Dynawall, CommChairs, and ConnecTable
• Streitz et al, Integrated Publication and
Information Systems Institute, Germany
 CHI 2002 video
19
AR Collaborative Environment
• Regenbrecht et al, sharedreality.com,
Germany
 CHI 2002 video
20
Groupware Implementation
Issues
• Group awareness
• Multi-user interfaces
 hard to design/conduct controlled experiments
• Concurrency control
 consistency and reconciliation
• Communication & coordination
 can’t see each other -> lose visual cues
 floor control
21
Implementation Issues (cont.)
• Latency
 e.g., user points at an object and talk
• Security and privacy
• more...
22
Implementation Issues –
Asynchronous Groupware
• Each user may have own copy of data
• Must integrate changes at some point
 example: programmers working on source
• Problems when conflicts between changes
 lock portions of work
– keeps state well defined, although doesn’t stop
semantically incompatible changes
 resolve conflicts via integration mechanism
23
Implementation Issues –
Synchronous Groupware
• >=Two users working on same data, at the
same time, in cooperation
• Extend Model View Controller (MVC)
 views & copies of the model are distributed
• Propagate command history
 must resolve conflicts among N histories
 at what level are commands?
– mouse position not good enough (e.g., different font sizes,
etc.)
24
Human Issues in CSCW
• People bring different perspectives and
views to a collaboration environment
• Goal of CSCW systems is often to
establish some common ground and to
facilitate understanding and interaction
25
Social Issues
• Can these technologies replace humanhuman interaction?
 can you send a “handshake” or a “hug”
 how does intimacy survive?
• Are too many social cues lost?
 facial expressions and body language for
enthusiasm, disinterest, anger
 will new cues develop? e.g., :)
26
Turn-taking, back-channeling
• In a face-to-face meeting, people do a lot
of self-management
• Preparing to speak: lean forward, clear
throat, shuffle paper
• Unfortunately, these are subtle gestures
which don’t pass well through today’s
technology
• Network delays make things much worse
27
Breakdowns
• Misunderstandings, talking over each
other, losing the thread of the meeting
• People are good at recognizing these and
recovering from them “repair”
• Mediated communication often makes it
harder
• E.g. email often escalates simple
misunderstandings into flaming sessions
28
Usage issues
• Communication in the real world has both
structured & unplanned episodes
 meeting by the Xerox machine
• Much face-to-face communication is really
side-by-side, w/ some artifact as focus
29
Turn Taking
• There are many subtle social conventions
about turn taking in an interaction





Personal space, closeness
Eye contact
Gestures
Body language
Conversation cues
30
Geography, Position
• In group dynamics, the physical layout of
individuals matters a lot
 “Power positions”
31
Impact of Media Types in
CSCW
• Video: Rich, but problems with gaze,
gesture, non-verbal communication.
• Audio: Conveys meaning well but not
necessarily location
• Text: Good for synchronous or
asynchronous communication
• Ink: Good for expressing ideas and brainstorming
32
Video
• Eye contact problems:
 Offset from camera to screen
 “Mona Lisa” effect
• Gesture has similar problems: try pointing at something
33
Audio
• Good for one-on-one communication
• Bad for meetings. Spatial localization is
normally lost. Can be put back but tricky.
34
Evaluation of Groupware
• Evaluating the usability and utility of
CSCW tools is quite challenging
 Need more participants
 Logistically difficult
 Apples - oranges
• Often use field studies and ethnographic
evaluations to assist
35
Evaluation Efforts at Calgary
• Uses modified heuristic evaluation
techniques

www.cpsc.ucalgary.ca/grouplab/papers/2001/01-HeurisiticsMechanics.EHCI/talk/EHCI_2.html
36
Successes of Groupware
• Email
 ubiquitous (Probably your grandparents have it)
• Newsgroups and mailing lists
• Videoconferencing
 growing slowly but steadily
• Lotus Notes
 integrates email, newsgroups, call tracking, status,
DB searching, document sharing, & scheduling
 very successful in corporations
– will the Web erode? Notes is more structured
37
Failures of Groupware
• Shared calendars
 making a come back? web-based?
• Why does groupware fail? (Grudin)





disparity between workers & beneficiaries
threats to existing power structures
insufficient critical mass (Web reduces)
violation of social taboos
rigidity that counters common practice or exceptions
38
Success/Failure of Groupware
• Depends on competing alternatives
 collaborators down the hall or across country?
• If users are committed to system, then etiquette
and conventions will evolve
 tend to arise from cultural & task background
 users from different orgs or cultural contexts may
clash
• Synchronous systems that work well for 2 users
may be less effective with more users
39