%% This BibTeX bibliography file was created using BibDesk. %% http://bibdesk.sourceforge.net/ %% Created for nova at 2006-02-27 14:55:07 +0100 %% Saved with string encoding Western (ASCII) @article{arminen2005, Abstract = {Location appears to be one of the most important aspects of context in mobile communication. It is a complex piece of information involving several levels of detail. Location intertwines with other relevant aspects of context: the parties' present activity, relative time and identities. The analysis of mobile conversations provides insights into the functions of ``location'' for mobile users. Most mobile calls involve a sequence in which location is reported. Location is made relevant by the parties' activities. Location telling takes place in five different activity contexts during mobile calls. Location may be an index of interactional availability, a precursor for mutual activity, part of an ongoing activity, or it may bear emergent relevance for the activity or be presented as a social fact. Typically, joint activities make relevant spatio-temporal location such as distance in minutes from the meeting point via the vehicle used. For users, location does not appear to be relevant in purely geographical terms.}, Annote = {This article addresses a topic close to my PhD research: the importance of location awareness in (mobile) communication. Prior to studying the importance of location-based services (especially when it comes to buddy finder or granny locators), the author put the emphasis on the understanding of this peculiar feature: the discussion about one's location over the phone. To understand the dynamic nature of location, we have to study the actual communicative practices in which location gains its value. ({\ldots}) Weilenmann has studied particularly the ways in which location references are used to signal communication difficulties: ``I can't talk now, I'm in a fitting room'' ({\ldots}) Laurier, for his part, has shown how mobile professionals routinely stated their locations on a mobile phone as a part of their mobile usage. Both these studies on actual communicative practices point out how the value of location is embedded in the activity in which the mobile user is engaged. ({\ldots}) 74 Finnish mobile phone conversations were recorded ({\ldots}) The material covered both mobile-to-mobile and landline-to-mobile or mobile-to-landline conversations ({\ldots}) The calls were transcribed and analysed in detail by using conversation analytical (CA) method. ({\ldots}) The usage of mobile communication device does not technically require the parties to get to know where the other party is. ({\ldots}) 62 mobile calls out of 74 involved a sequence in which the mobile party stated her or his location to the other party As for the context of this question, the author found that: Location telling during mobile calls takes place in five different activity contexts. In other words, location seems relevant for the parties in mobile interaction during five different types of activities. ({\ldots}) Location may be an index of interactional availability, a precursor for mutual activity, part of an ongoing activity, or it may bear emergent relevance for the activity or be presented as a social fact. ({\ldots}) Most location-telling sequences in these data are linked with practical arrangements. People state their location as a precursor for some practical arrangements ({\ldots}) Location telling is also commonly done as a part of the real-time ongoing activity in which the parties are engaged. ({\ldots}) Location can also be a mutual real-time co-ordination task, such as seeing each other in the cafeteria to meet there ({\ldots}) Finally, a kind of location that is also realized during the ongoing activities is a virtual location referring to a web page or other material at hand to be shared with the communicative partner. ({\ldots}) A not common, but existing, social practice involves location telling due to its social, symbolic qualities [exemple: beach which signify `having fun'] Now, for the social functions of discussing locations: Location may be an index of interactional availability, a precursor for mutual activity, part of an ongoing activity, or it may bear emergent relevance for the activity or be presented as a social fact. ({\ldots}) International availability: audio-physical and social features of proximal location: noise (disco), network availability, (train, remote areas), involvement with proximal interaction, intimacy of situation (toilet, etc.) ({\ldots}) Praxiological -- spatio-temporal availability: readiness to engage in action (Are you doing anything special? Can you come to x?) -- spatio-temporal location of a party vis-a`-vis the engaged activity: temporal distance (half an hour [by car, by train, on foot, etc.] -- real-time perspicuous location in an ongoing action: visibility (I'm at x where are you), real-time location (I just saw a reindeer by the road, beware---[told to the car driving behind]) -- instructable location: spatialized requests (I'm/accident at the crossroads of A and B, etc.) -- proximate praxiological location: microco-ordination of activity (I'm feeling his pulse, the wound stretches from elbow to breast, etc.) -- virtual location (I'm on the web page x) ({\ldots}) Socioemotional -- socio-emotional significance of location: biographical relevance (I'm at the cottage of x/my friend, I'm driving car with x), cultural significance (I'm visiting x (old church, museum, medieval city, etc.), aesthetic significance (it's very scenic here) Why do I blog this? this kind of study is of tremendous relevance to my phd research since I address the effects of location-awareness on collaboration processes: communication, coordination, division of labor, mutual modeling{\ldots} What the author described here is very interesting, it's one of the seldom resource about this fact (along with Marc Relieu, Laurier (and there too, plus this one by Weilenmann). However, the results from our field experiment with CatchBob makes me bit skeptical about the authors' conclusion; when it comes to the implications of this study to LBS, he says ``Location awareness that would also indicate the user's estimated temporal distance from the destination would have a wide applicability for a majority of mobile users. A simple and usable technical solution would immediately meet the end users' needs``. The reason why I am skeptical is that automating location-awareness can sometimes leads to putting the emphasis on an information (others' location versus others' availability, intentions{\ldots}) that might be not relevant for the time being. Another problem is the kind of location that should be automated and made relevant for other parties (place? country? lat/long? {\ldots}).}, Author = {I. Arminen}, Date-Added = {2006-02-27 14:52:40 +0100}, Date-Modified = {2006-02-27 14:55:04 +0100}, Journal = {Personal and Ubiquitous Computing.}, Keywords = {location-awareness, mobile phone, location disclosure}, Title = {Social Functions of Location in Mobile Telephony}, Year = {2005}} @article{belloti2001, Abstract = {This essay considers the problem of defining the context that context-aware systems should pay attention to from a human perspective. In particular, we ar- gue that there are human aspects of context that cannot be sensed or even in- ferred by technological means, so context-aware systems cannot be designed simply to act on our behalf. Rather, they will have to be able to defer to users in an efficient and nonobtrusive fashion. Our point is particularly relevant for sys- tems that are constructed such that applications are architecturally isolated from the sensing and inferencing that governs their behavior. We propose a de- sign framework that is intended to guide thinking about accommodating hu- man aspects of context. This framework presents four design principles that support intelligibility of system behavior and accountability of human users and a number of human-salient details of context that must be accounted for in con- text-aware system design. }, Annote = {The paper is a very high-level computer science article about context-awareness and its corollary social issues. It is focused on the problem of defining which context-aware elements might be automatically extracted and shown to the users of interactive systems. In particular, we argue that there are human aspects of context that cannot be sensed or even inferred by technological means, so context-aware systems cannot be designed simply to act on our behalf. Rather, they will have to be able to defer to users in an efficient and nonobtrusive fashion. Why do I blog this? This is really one of the conclusion of my phd research: certain processes (like location awareness) should not always be automated, sometimes deferring it to users can be more important as we saw in Catchbob!. BUT: Further, experience has shown that people are very poor at remembering to update system representations of their own state; even if it is something as static as whether they will allow attempts at connection in general from some person (Bellotti, 1997;Bellotti & Sellen,1993) or, more dynamically, current availability levels (Wax,1996). So we cannot rely on users to continually provide this information explicitly. This might depend on the ACTIVITY, in catchbob people kept updating their positions on the map so that others could be aware of what they were doing because it was relevant for the time being and the cost of doing it was low. Not directly related to my work, the paper also describes two principles for ubiquitouis computing: Intelligibility: Context-aware systems that seek to act upon what they infer about the context must be able to represent to their users what they know, how they know it, and what they are doing about it. Accountability: Context-aware systems must enforce user accountability when, based on their inferences about the social context, they seek to mediate user actions that impact others.}, Author = {V. Bellotti and K. Edwards}, Date-Added = {2006-02-17 17:32:52 +0100}, Date-Modified = {2006-02-17 17:34:26 +0100}, Journal = {Human-Computer Interaction}, Keywords = {context-awareness, intelligibility, accountability}, Number = {2-4}, Pages = {193-212}, Title = {Intelligibility and accountability: human considerations in context-aware systems}, Url = {http://www.cs.bris.ac.uk/Teaching/Resources/COMSM0106/papers/Bellotti-2001.pdf}, Volume = {16}, Year = {2001}} @inproceedings{chalmers2005, Abstract = {New pervasive games draw upon the location of players and objects as well as the availability of several mobile players to create an appealing experience in a large game site. The games include support for interaction other players as well as with location. The advances in games research is of benefit for specific mobile work where a vast site is both topic and resource to get the job done. We discuss how these new means for annotating the location as well as sharing information with colleagues could possibly improve individual work, collaboration as well as learning. }, Annote = {The paper brings forward the idea of advances in pervasive games research (mostly location-based games) as of benefit for specific mobile work where a vast site is both topic and resource to get the job done. They discuss how place-based annotations and information sharing could possibly improve individual work, collaboration as well as learning. recent research in pervasive gaming demonstrates principles and lessons that can be applied more generally in CSCW systems for mobile work in vast work settings. There are similarities between many pervasive games and mobile work in vast settings since both have locations as resource and as topic, and more general issues to draw on with regard to how a large unfamiliar space becomes a place that one has experience of; that one understands in a social and practical way, and can interact in. The similarities are: Many forms of mobile work include collaboration and a focus on the geography both as a topic and a resource in the work. The size of a work site influence the way work is done. A vast work site has the consequence that, workers have to move around to handle tasks, finding colleagues to enable collaboration is difficult, organisational procedures are difficult to relate to specific local objects, movement in vehicles negatively affect possibilities to communicate with locally available colleagues, and mobile workers become more solitary than co-located workers. Coordination is then achieved through negotiations between different localities that take into account the changing situation in each locality The articles gives example of collaborative activities for which space and others' location is important: snow clearance in airport + road + bus driver's. The authors then argues that games do not just support the use of locations as resource in mobile game play, but also establish collaboration on finding and marking locations, and building up experience and understanding of those locations fit into a larger picture of social and technological interaction. ({\ldots}) Some of the games above support context dependent gesture recognition. It includes two dimensions of context dependence. ({\ldots}) We see strong and useful parallels with the situation of workers who create their work within organisational rules but also within their wider technical, social and environmental setting. The challenge for future research is to allow such design potential to be realised in ways that build on current work practices, and yet let people change those practices for the better as they use our technology to go about their work in their way in their work community. Why do I blog this? this is very close to what we think too Our take is rather to study how players collaborate using these games so that we can understand how collaboration might be affected by location information (this is actually my phd thesis). This paper is very relevant to my phd word since it fills a kind of missing link about why using a pervasive game to inform CSCW practices.}, Author = {M. Chalmers and O. Juhlin}, Booktitle = {Paper presented at the workshop "Computer Games & CSCW" at ECSCW'05.}, Date-Added = {2006-02-09 14:19:28 +0100}, Date-Modified = {2006-02-09 14:21:34 +0100}, Title = {New uses for mobile pervasive games - Lessons learned for CSCW systems to support collaboration in vast work sites}, Url = {http://www.tii.se/mobility/Files/NewUsesforMobilePervasiveGames050620.pdf}, Year = {2005}} @inproceedings{williams2005, Abstract = {When computation moves off the desktop, how will it transform the new spaces that it comes to occupy? How will people encounter and understand these spaces, and how will they interact with each other through the augmented capabilities of such spaces? We have been exploring these questions through a prototype system in which augmented objects are used to control a complex audio 'soundscape.' The system involves a range of objects distributed through a space, supporting simultaneous use by many participants. We have deployed this system at a number of settings in which groups of people have explored it collaboratively. Our initial explorations of the use of this system reveal a num- ber of important considerations for how we design for the interrelationships be- tween people, objects, and spaces. }, Annote = {This paper addresses this very important question: how will ubiquitous computing transform the new spaces that it comes to occupy; or What sorts of impacts on space result when it is populated by ubicomp technologies? The paper starts by describing how space and social action are tightly entwined. Then they examine the development and evaluation of a collective dynamic audio installation called SignalPlay (a series of physical objects with embedded computational properties collectively control a dynamic ``sound-scape'' which responds to the orientation, configuration, and movement of the component objects). Some excerpts of this insightful paper: Our fundamental concern is with the ways in which we encounter space not simply as a container for our actions, but as a setting within which we act. The embodied nature of activity is an issue for a range of technologies. ({\ldots}) This social character means that spaces are not ``given''; they are the products of active processes of interpretation. The meaningfulness of space is a consequence of our encounters with it. For ubiquitous computing, this is an important consideration. ({\ldots}) The research challenge, then, is to understand how it is that computationally augmented spaces will be legible; with how people will be able to understand them and act within them. ({\ldots}) A number of broad observations are particularly notable. ({\ldots}) First, it was notable that people sought to understand the system not as a whole but in terms of the individual actions of different components. ({\ldots}) Objects take on meanings and interpretations in their own right rather than as elements of a ``system.'' This suggests, then, that user's experiences and interpretations of ubiquitous computing systems will often be of a quite different sort than those of their designers, because of the radically different ways in which they encounter these systems. ({\ldots}) Second, one particularly interesting area for further exploration is the temporal or- ganization of activity. ({\ldots}) The temporality of interaction and encounters with technology is a neglected aspect of interaction design and an important part of our ongoing work. ({\ldots}) Lastly, ubiquitous computing technologies are ones through which people encounter and come to understand infrastructures. ({\ldots}) The presence or absence of infrastructure, or differences in its availability, becomes one of the ways in which spaces are understood and navigated. At conferences or in airports, the seats next to power outlets are in high demand, and in a wide range of settings, the strength of a cellular telephone signal becomes an important aspect of how space is assessed and used. As we develop new technologies that rely on physical but invisible infrastructures, we create new ways of understanding the structure of space. ({\ldots}) Our design models must address space not as a passive container of objects and actions, but as something that is explicitly constructed, managed, and negotiated in the course of interaction Why do I blog this? simply, a large part of my research is geared towards studying the relations between space/place and social/cognitive processes; this paper is very relevant for that matter since it offers some pertinent ideas about this would be applied in the field of ubiquitous computing. I also appreciated the idea of taking as the core of ubicomp the relationship between people, objects, and activities, cast in terms of the ways in which practice evolves. Each of their findings are important in the results I am currently analysing concerning the CatchBob! game usage: As for the first point (people sought to understand the system not as a whole but in terms of the individual actions of different components), the features we provided in CatchBob have some individual consequence such as the location-awareness tool that in itself create a certain behavior consistency. The temporal organization of activity is very important in the CatchBob! pervasive game: each different part of the activity is different can the interface features have a different impact on them. The link with the infrastructure and the activity of using the ubicomp tech in Catchbob lays in the fact that sometime the network is available and sometimes not + the accuracy of the positioning/message exchange varies over time, well this will be fabien's phd work.}, Author = {A. Williams and E. Kabisch and P. Dourish}, Booktitle = {Proceedings of Intenational Conference on Ubiquitous Computing Ubicomp 2005}, Date-Added = {2006-02-06 14:48:25 +0100}, Date-Modified = {2006-02-06 14:50:54 +0100}, Keywords = {space, place, infrastructure, social}, Pages = {287-304}, Title = {From Interaction to Participation: Configuring Space through Embodied Interaction}, Url = {http://www.ics.uci.edu/~jpd/publications/2005/WilliamsKabischDourish-InteractionParticipation-Ubicomp2005.pdf}, Year = {2005}} @inproceedings{dourish2006, Abstract = {Although ethnography has become a common approach in HCI research and design, considerable confusion still attends both ethnographic practice and the metrics by which it should be evaluated in HCI. Often, ethnography is seen as an approach to field investigation that can generate requirements for systems development; by that token, the major evaluative criterion for an ethnographic studies is the implications it can provide for design. Exploring the nature of ethnographic inquiry, this paper suggests that ``implications for design'' may not be the best metric for evaluation and may, indeed, fail to capture the value of ethnographic investigations. }, Annote = {The article criticizes the canonical papers (in the field of Human-Computer Interactions) which reports results from an ethnographic study with a final section called ``implications for design''. The normative epistemology of the HCI field makes it mandatory (as the author mentions ``the absence of this section tends to be correlated with negative reviews''). In this paper, Paul Dourish wants to explore ``the ways in which the ``implications for design'' may underestimate, misstate, or misconstrue the goals and mechanisms of ethnographic investigation``. To him, this focus is misplaced and researchers are consequently missing the point of how ethnography could benefit to HCI research. Some pertinent excerpts (with regard to my work + research interests): ethnographic methods were originally brought into HCI research in response to the perceived problems of moving from laboratory studies to broader understandings technology use. ({\ldots}) The term ``ethnography,'' indeed, is often used as shorthand for investigations that are, to some extent, in situ, qualitative, or open-ended. ({\ldots}) a corpus of field techniques for collecting and organizing data ({\ldots}) often been aligned with the requirements gathering phase of a traditional software development model [a good connection here -nicolas] ({\ldots}) In reducing ethnography to a toolbox of methods for extracting data from settings, however, the methodological view marginalizes or obscures the theoretical and analytic components of ethnographic analysis. But Dourish does not want to say that ethnography is useless to find implications for design, he'd rather want to show it's not only meant to bring out this kind of contribution. And this is very interesting: Ethnography provides insight into the organization of social settings, but its goal is not simply to save the reader a trip; rather, it provides models for thinking about those settings and the work that goes on there. The value of ethnography, then, is in the models it provides and the ways of thinking that it supports. Ethnography has a critical role to play in interactive system design, but this may be as much in shaping research (or corporate) strategy as in uncovering the constraints. Why do I blog this? while considering the global framework for my PhD thesis, I have in mind this kind of ideas; especially when it goes to the contribution to the HCI field. However, even though I try to include some mixed methodologies, my work is more quantitative-dominant, on top of which I use ethnographical methodologies (for instance for results triangulation).}, Author = {P. Dourish}, Booktitle = {Proc. ACM Conf. Human Factors in Computing Systems CHI 2006}, Date-Added = {2006-01-23 17:56:16 +0100}, Date-Modified = {2006-01-23 17:58:00 +0100}, Keywords = {ethnography, design, hci}, Month = {April}, Publisher = {ACM}, Title = {Implications for Design}, Url = {http://www.isr.uci.edu/~jpd/classes/readings/Dourish-Implications.pdf}, Year = {2006}} @inproceedings{dix2005, Abstract = {This paper is about our experiences of space in the Equator project (www.equator.ac.uk), in particular, the way in which multiple spaces, both virtual and physical, can co-exist. By this we mean that people and objects may have locations in and relationships to both physical space and one or more virtual spaces, and that these different spaces together interact to give an overall system behaviour and user experience. The concepts we develop in this chapter are driven partly by practical experience, and partly by previous theoretical work such as the models and taxonomies of spatial context in (Dix et al., 2000), the models for mixed reality boundaries (Koleva et al., 1999) and capturing human spatial understanding exposed in sources such maps, myths and mathematics (Dix, 2000). We are also building on established work on informal reasoning about space from the AI and GIS communities (Grigni et al, 1995; Papadias et al., 1996) similar to Allen's well known temporal relations (Allen, 1991). We start by looking at some of the practical experiences in a number of Equator `experience' projects and how these have each required several kinds of interacting spaces: real and virtual. We then use this as a means to look more abstractly at different kinds of space and the way these overlap and relate to one another. In order to examine some aspects in greater detail we will use two artificial scenarios which each highlight specific problems and issues. Finally, we will discuss how this is contributing to ongoing work including the construction of an Equator `space infrastructure'. }, Annote = {A. Dix, A. Friday, B. Koleva, T. Rodden, H. Muller, C. Randell, A. Steed, ``Managing multiple spaces'' In P. Turner, E. Davenport (eds.) Space, Spatiality and Technologies, Kluwer. The authors' aim is analyse the way in which multiple spaces, both virtual and physical, can co-exist. By this we mean that people and objects may have locations in and relationships to both physical space and one or more virtual spaces, and that these different spaces together interact to give an overall system behaviour and user experience. They use 4 cases (City, CityWide, the Drift Table and Ambient Wood) to see how multiple physical and virtual spaces interact. The choice of the different environment is pretty pertinent since there are mobile applications and an interactive table. They then discriminate 3 types of space: real space -- the locations and activities of actual objects and people in physical space measured space -- the representation of that space in the computer and the representation of locations of objects and people from sensor data, etc. virtual space -- electronic spaces created to be portrayed to users, but not necessarily representing explicitly the real world I like this representation, here is how they represent it (the discussion about each relation is vrey insightful afterwards): Why do I blog this? this spatial topic is very central to my research in the sense that I adding another point to each these 3 spaces: a kind of social layer. It's actually thinking about how objects or people relates to the real space (for instance a person located somewhere) the measured space (which feature do we measure from this person? his/her proximity to me?) or the virtual space (What do we represent? and what do we want the user to be aware of with regards to this person/object?). Do people also keep in mind a representation of their partners' position when they're collaborating? Is is it useful in terms of task performance? communication? collaborative processes? The model they propose is very relevant and is a good brick to work on. An as they say ``Given a measured space we then obtain the location of objects within that space using some form of sensing. This sensing may vary in accuracy. ({\ldots}) there is not a simple relationship between the real and the measured``. This is definitely what fabien is investigating: how people deal with this gap between the real and the measured (which is in the end what is reflected by the service). The authors conclude, from their case studies, that people deal remarkably well with complex special relationships, but that it is harder for mere computers. I am not so sure about it (depending on the level of infoliteracy of the users, familiarity with the technology{\ldots}) but hey let's fabien work on this Finally, there is surely some food for thoughts for end of cyberspace{\ldots}}, Author = {A. Dix and A. Friday and B. Koleva and T. Rodden and H. Muller and C. Randell and A. Steed}, Booktitle = {Space, Spatiality and Technologies}, Date-Added = {2006-01-11 14:44:18 +0100}, Date-Modified = {2006-01-11 14:46:31 +0100}, Editor = {P. Turner and E. Davenport}, Keywords = {space, location-awareness}, Publisher = {Kluwer}, Title = {Managing multiple spaces}, Url = {http://www.equator.ac.uk/index.php?module=uploads&func=download&fileId=221}, Year = {2005}} @article{kaasinen2003, Abstract = {Mobile contexts of use vary a lot, and may even be continuously changing during use. The context is much more than location, but its other elements are still difficult to identify or measure. Location informa- tion is becoming an integral part of different mobile devices. Current mobile services can be enhanced with location-aware features, thus providing the user with a smooth transition towards context-aware services. Po- tential application fields can be found in areas such as travel information, shopping, entertainment, event in- formation and different mobile professions. This paper studies location-aware mobile services from the user's point of view. The paper draws conclusions about key issues related to user needs, based on user interviews, laboratory and field evaluations with users, and expert evaluations of location-aware services. The user needs are presented under five main themes: topical and comprehensive contents, smooth user interaction, personal and user-generated contents, seamless service entities and privacy issues. }, Annote = { The paper is interesting with regard to the user's expectations and usage of location-based services. Here some excerpts I found relevant. First about the goal: We have carried out several empirical studies to study user attitudes, needs and preferences for location-aware services. We started with scenario evaluations in group interviews. The aim of this evaluation was to study broadly the attitudes of the potential users towards different personal navigation services ({\ldots})We have also evaluated with users different commercial location-aware services in Finland: Benefon Esc! used together with a Yellow Pages short message service (SMS), the user can get information on nearby services as well as their location, which the Benefon Esc! can display on the map screen. ({\ldots}) Sonera Pointer services that utilised cell-based positioning. Pointer Bensa (Gasoline) gave information on the cheapest gasoline stations in the vicinity of the user. Pointer Opas (Guide) offered information about the district around the user{\ldots} Then some of the results: criticism of new technology was brought up in many group interviews. A predestined and over-controlled environment was seen as dubious, and the interviewees did not accept the rational and purpose-oriented attitude to life that they identified in the scenarios. In addition, some of the scenarios, for instance proactive shopping and exhibition guides, were seen as going too far beyond the real needs of people. ({\ldots}) Our interviews with potential users and the user evaluations of some of the first location-aware services point out that user expectations are high and that the users in Finland at the time of the evaluations trusted current service providers and policy-makers for issues related to privacy protection. This constitutes a good starting point for location-aware services. It did not occur to most users that they could be located when using location-aware services. This puts additional responsibility on the service providers and policy makers. ({\ldots}) The users need seamless service chains that serve them throughout their mobile activity, e.g. planning, searching services, finding the route as well as visiting and storing information. Why do I blog this? The article raises important concerns, especially about users' expectations and how they feel being tracked (or not feeling it!). However, I am quit skeptical about the last thing: I don't really think a seamless service is really possible and it's maybe better to design applications that take advantage of seams ({\`a} la Chalmers) or to educate users.}, Author = {E. Kaasinen}, Date-Added = {2005-12-13 07:54:55 +0100}, Date-Modified = {2005-12-13 07:58:50 +0100}, Journal = {Personal and Ubiquitous Computing}, Keywords = {location-awareness, cell phone, users expectations}, Pages = {70--79}, Title = {User needs for location-aware mobile services}, Url = {http://www.techkwondo.com/external/pdf/reports/user_need_for_location_mobile_svcs.pdf}, Volume = {7}, Year = {2003}} @article{crabtree2005, Abstract = {The field of CSCW research emerged with the development of distributed computing systems and attempts to understand the socially organized (`collaborative' or `cooperative') nature of work in order to embed such systems in the workplace. As a field of interdisciplinary inquiry CSCW was motivated by technological developments and the need to understand the particular contexts within which those developments were intended to resonate. In other words, it is no mere accident that CSCW took work as its topic and resource -- the historical nature of IT research from which the field emerged meant that for all practical purposes it could not be otherwise. Yet times change. IT research moves on. Today mobile, ambient, pervasive, ubiquitous, mixed reality and wearable computing, et cetera, are of fundamental concern to the contemporary computing research community. Furthermore, these developments are accompanied by a movement away from the workplace to focus on diverse settings in everyday life: homes, games, museums, photography, tourism, performances, indeed diverse bodies of people and pursuits that generally fall under the conceptual rubric of the `ludic'. Accompanying this shift away from work is a call for new approaches and concepts that will enable researchers to better understand the ludic and inform design appropriately. In this paper we seek to address the boundaries of CSCW and the ability of CSCW to respond to contemporary research agendas. We present an ethnomethodological study of a location-based mixed reality game to demonstrate the continued relevance of CSCW approaches and concepts to contemporary agendas in IT research. }, Annote = {The authors advocates for extending the boundaries of Computer Supported Collaborative Work to fit with new research agendas in computer science: mobile/ambient/pervasive/mixed reality/ubiquitous computing and to correspond to the movement which makes computing going from workplaces to other ``spaces'': home/art performance and other domains like games or photography. Their point is that CSCW, as an interdisciplinary research field, is still relevant to address new fields than just `work'. Using an ethnomethodological study of a location-based game, they exemplify this issue to demonstrate the continued salience of existing CSCW approaches and concepts that were developed in the study of work to study ludic phenomenon. We employ it here to show that ludic pursuits such as games may be studied as collaborative or cooperative activities that rely on, exploit, and exhibit some familiar social organizational characteristics, and that those characteristics may be drawn upon to inform the design of technologies supporting ludic pursuits as they have been used to inform the design of technologies supporting what Gaver (2001) describes as `rational' pursuits in the workplace. The study is used as a concrete example then and followed by further discussion of the boundaries of CSCW, and the salience of existing CSCW approaches and concepts to new and emerging agendas of IT research. The underlying take in this paper is to make computer scientists and interaction designerss (well the reader of this Journal of CSCW) aware that games and playful activities are not kid stuff and deserved to be included in the CSCW research repertoire because it's relevant and important. I like this statement. In addition, the paper offers great insights about their ethnographical study of the Can You See Me Now? location-based game, which addresses various issues of interests to our projects (like how players dealt with uncertainty).}, Author = {A. Crabtree and T. Rodden and S. Benford}, Date-Added = {2005-11-16 11:17:53 +0100}, Date-Modified = {2005-11-16 11:20:54 +0100}, Journal = {Journal of CSCW}, Keywords = {CSCW, location-based game, game}, Month = {June}, Number = {3}, Pages = {217 - 251}, Title = {Moving with the Times: IT Research and the Boundaries of CSCW}, Url = {http://www.crg.cs.nott.ac.uk/~axc/documents/JCSCW_2005.pdf}, Volume = {14}, Year = {2005}} @inproceedings{benford2005b, Abstract = {We study a collaborative location-based game in which groups of `lions' hunt together on a virtual savannah that is overlaid on an open playing field. The game implements a straight-forward approach to location-based triggering in which players must be in the same spatial locale in order to share information and act together. Comparison of video recordings of physical play with system recordings of game events reveals subtle and complex interactions between highly dynamic player behavior and the underlying technology. While players exhibit a fluid approach to group formation, the system embodies a more rigid view, leading to difficulties with sharing context and coordinating actions, most notably when groups of players span virtual locale boundaries or initiate actions while on the move. We propose techniques for extending locales to support more flexible grouping and also discuss the broader implications of our findings for location-based applications in general. }, Annote = {The uncertainty also lies in the fact that representing collaborating groups properly is sometimes difficult as attested by the field study of the educational game Savannah [5]. In this game, players had to be in the same spatial locale in order to share information and act together. The system they tested had some problems with sharing context and conversely coordinating actions since flexible group formation was hard to represent (because players spanned virtual local boundaries or initiate actions while on the move). }, Author = {Benford}, Booktitle = {Proceedings of CHI 2005}, Date-Added = {2005-11-09 08:49:24 +0100}, Date-Modified = {2005-11-09 08:51:27 +0100}, Organization = {ACM}, Pages = {721-730}, Title = {Life on the Edge: Supporting Collaboration in Location-Based Experiences}, Year = {2005}} @article{abowd1997, Author = {Abowd, G.D. and Atkenson, C.G. and Hong, J. and Long, S and Kooper, R. and Pinkerton, M}, Date-Added = {2005-10-26 17:20:28 +0200}, Date-Modified = {2005-10-26 17:22:35 +0200}, Journal = {Wireless Networks}, Keywords = {location-based service, tourism}, Number = {5}, Pages = {421-433}, Title = {Cyberguide: a mobile context-aware tour guide.}, Volume = {3}, Year = {1997}} @inproceedings{barkhuus2005, Abstract = {This paper presents Treasure, an outdoor mobile multiplayer game inspired by Weiser's notion of seams, gaps and breaks in different media. Playing Treasure involves movement in and out of a wi-fi network, using PDAs to pick up virtual `coins' that may be scattered outside network coverage. Coins have to be uploaded to a server to gain game points, and players can collaborate with teammates to double the points given for an upload. Players can also steal coins from opponents. As they move around, players' PDAs sample network signal strength and update coverage maps. Reporting on a study of players taking part in multiple games, we discuss how their tactics and strategies developed as their experience grew with successive games. We suggest that meaningful play arises in just this way, and that repeated play is vital when evaluating such games.}, Address = {Tokyo, Japan}, Annote = {The paper tackles the issue of how the experience of multiple games changed they way users played with a location-based game and how this led to more complex form of collaboration and competition over time. this is really close to what we do with our location-based games experiments (the methodology is quite similar, we just put more emphasis on quantitative data lately but we're also focusing on more qualitative insights). The strength of this paper lays in the multiple play: how repeated trials can be used to inform practitioners of a good game design.}, Author = {L. Barkhuus and M. Chalmers and P. Tennent and M. Hall and M. Bell and B. Brown}, Booktitle = {Proceedings of UbiComp 2005}, Date-Added = {2005-10-11 20:10:59 +0200}, Date-Modified = {2005-11-16 17:33:23 +0100}, Keywords = {location-based game, collaboration, seamful design}, Month = {September}, Pages = {358-374}, Title = {Picking Pockets on the Lawn: The Development of Tactics and Strategies in a Mobile Game}, Url = {http://www.dcs.gla.ac.uk/~matthew/papers/treasureUbicomp2005.pdf}, Year = {2005}} @article{benford2005x, Abstract = {We present a study of a mobile mixed reality game called Can You See Me Now? in which online players are chased through a virtual model of a city by `runners' (i.e., professional performers equipped with GPS and WiFi technologies) who have to run through the actual city streets in order to catch the players. We present an ethnographic study of the game as it toured through two different cities that draws upon video recordings of online players, runners, technical support crew, and also on system logs of text communication. Our study reveals the diverse ways in which online players experienced the uncertainties inherent in GPS and WiFi, including being mostly unaware of them, but sometimes seeing them as problems, or treating the as a designed feature of the game, and even occasionally exploiting them within gameplay. In contrast, the runners and technical crew were fully aware of these uncertainties and continually battled against them through an ongoing and distributed process of orchestration. As a result, we encourage designers to deal with such uncertainties as a fundamental characteristic of location-based experiences rather than treating them as exceptions or bugs that might be ironed out in the future. We argue that designers should explicitly consider four potential states of being of a mobile participant -- connected and tracked, connected but not tracked, tracked but not connected, and neither connected nor tracked. We then introduce five strategies that might be used to deal with uncertainty in these different states for different kinds of participant: remove it, hide it, manage it, reveal it and exploit it. Finally, we present proposals for new orchestration interfaces that reveal the `seams' in the underlying technical infrastructure by visualizing the recent performance of GPS and WiFi and predicting the likely future performance of GPS.}, Annote = { It think that after this paper should be considered as a seminal article about ethnographical analysis of a location-based game. Besides, after research projects like Pirates!, AR Quake and BotFighters, it's one of the most important early example in the field. It also describes interesting aspects about uncertainty arising from the use of GPS and WiFi, which is a topic we are working on with Fabien. They somehow use some quantitative indexes like packet loss intervals + periods loss; we're considering to move further by using other measures and correlate them with task performance or communication frequency/quality in CatchBob!}, Author = {S. Benford and A. Crabtree and M. Flintham and A. Drozd and R. Anastasi and M. Paxton and N. Tandavanitj and M. Adams and J. Row-Farr}, Date-Added = {2005-10-04 10:52:10 +0200}, Date-Modified = {2005-10-04 10:55:43 +0200}, Journal = {Transactions of CHI}, Keywords = {location-based game, game, location-awareness, ethnography}, Title = {Can You See Me Now}, Url = {http://www.crg.cs.nott.ac.uk/~axc/documents/ToCHI_2005.pdf}, Year = {2005}} @inproceedings{licoppe2005, Abstract = {We present a case study about the uses in Japan of a geo-localised mobile game. The gameplay is that of a collection game where users, which are able to communicate between one another within a game-related text messaging system, must gather sets of related objects, that are both ``virtual'' and localized (that is accessible only within a given cell). The key feature is a virtual onscreen map that is continuously reset with each server request, and which features geo-localized players and virtual objects within a radius of approximately one kilometer. This particular interface therefore allows players to ``see'' one another onscreen. We analyze the interactional conventions that develop through such mediated encounter and more specifically how ``seing'' one another in this way and the geographical closeness it entails become a pretext to start text-messaging exchanges, even between unknown players. We discuss the ways in which such encounters involving mutual perception on the screen of the mobile phone are still embodied, by analyzing the work users occasionally accomplish to realign the onscreen perspective with their embodied one. We eventually describe some typical interactional patterns that may develop from such onscreen encounters and provide them with meaning, namely apparent civil inattention and lateral noticing by text messaging, or gift-giving practice between experts and newbies. This case study of an advanced geo-localized game provides a first glimpse of what the experience of living in a mobile-based augmented urban public space might be like, and of the kind of social order that might characterize it. }, Address = {Hungarian Academy of Sciences}, Annote = {The article is about how location awareness of others in mobile game Mogi Mogi is important to create affordances for social encounters, excerpts I found relevant: a case study about the uses in Japan of a geo-localised mobile game. The gameplay is that of a collection game where users, which are able to communicate between one another within a game-related text messaging system, must gather sets of related objects, that are both ``virtual'' and localized (that is accessible only within a given cell). The key feature is a virtual onscreen map that is continuously reset with each server request, and which features geo-localized players and virtual objects within a radius of approximately one kilometer. This particular interface therefore allows players to ``see'' one another onscreen. We analyze the interactional onventions that develop through such mediated encounter and more specifically how ``seing'' one another in this way and the geographical closeness it entails become a pretext to start text-messaging exchanges, even between unknown players. This case study of an advanced geo-localized game provides a first glimpse of what the experience of living in a mobile-based augmented urban public space might be like, and of the kind of social order that might characterize it. The empirical work draws on a series of in-depth interviews with ten players who had played actively for over three months, and on the analysis of a large anonymous corpus of mobile messages exchanged between the players. The `onscreen encounter' in which the protagonists are able to perceive their respective icons on the screen map and to share that perception configures a form of encounter peculiar to context-aware cooperative devices like Mogi. We have analysed how the participants reflexively oriented themselves towards publicizing their spatial position in order to develop specific formats of conversational openness. Through an analysis of written interactions between players, we have also shown how they oriented themselves in relation to potential vulnerability of their personal territories and ooperated to align or disalign incorporated 'situations' and screen 'situations'. I am interested in the socio-cognitive functions of location-awareness, and its relation to mobile technology. In this case, we have an example of how location/proximity awareness as a social affordance to create specific encounters in the Mogi community. }, Author = {C. Licoppe and Y. Inada}, Booktitle = {Proceedings of the Learning in the Mobile Age Conference}, Date-Added = {2005-09-14 13:45:08 +0200}, Date-Modified = {2005-09-14 13:47:27 +0200}, Keywords = {mogi mogi, mobile computing, location-awareness}, Month = {April}, Title = {``Seing'' one another onscreen and the construction of social order in a mobile-based augmented public space: The uses of a geo-localized mobile game in Japan}, Url = {http://www.fil.hu/mobil/2005/Licoppe_final.pdf}, Year = {2005}} @article{ivory2001, Abstract = {Usability evaluation is an increasingly important part of the user interface design process. However, usability evaluation can be expensive in terms of time and human resources, and automation is therefore a promising way to augment existing approaches. This article presents an extensive survey of usability evaluation methods, organized according to a new taxonomy that emphasizes the role of automation. The survey analyzes existing techniques, identifies which aspects of usability evaluation automation are likely to be of use in future research, and suggests new ways to expand existing approaches to better support usability evaluation.}, Annote = {This paper provides a relevant summary all the current techniques. Even though it's mostly related to usability (which is something a bit too low-level for my ressearch needs), it gives a nice overview of the existing techniques. It's a good add-on to Mike Kuniavky's `User Experience' book (which is one of the best introduction and how-to for user-experience research).}, Author = {M. Ivory and M. Hearst}, Date-Added = {2005-06-01 15:42:06 +0200}, Date-Modified = {2005-06-01 15:47:32 +0200}, Journal = {ACM Computing Services}, Keywords = {usability, research, techniques}, Number = {4}, Pages = {470-516}, Title = {The State of the Art in Automating Usability Evaluation of User Interfaces}, Url = {http://bailando.sims.berkeley.edu/papers/p470-ivory.pdf}, Volume = {33}, Year = {2001}} @article{washburn2003, Abstract = {Computer games and the technologies marketed to support them provide unique resources for psychological research. In contrast to the sterility, simplicity, and artificiality that characterizes many cognitive tests, game-like tasks can be complex, ecologically valid, and even fun. In the present paper,the history of psychological research with video games is reviewed, and several thematic benefits of this paradigm are identified. These benefits, as well as the possible pitfalls of research with computer game technology and game-like tasks, are illustrated with data from comparative and cognitive investigations.}, Annote = {The paper provide a brief history of psychological research with computer games (with a peculiar emphasis on psychology/physiological research). It also highlights the problems caused by the use of game-based reasearch: - difficult to use commercial video games for data capture (not designed for that) - experimenters have not full control over all the variables - consequently it requires to modify the game which is non trivial and time consuming - games can introduce complexity to the experimental situation that has negative consequences (too much context compared to simple psychological tasks) - there is a perception problem associated with the use of games of computer games in psychological research (because games = entertainment for them), not a problem for people who want to study the effects of game on a psychological process but it's an issue for researchers who want to use game-like task or technology to understand the basic process that underlie behavior. That is why people speak about "game-like tasks" and not just games (just to show that they're serious folks and not gamers ) Benefits of game-based research: - more motivation (also pointed by others) and then better performances - enjoyment and well-being - a common platform across researchers - new opportunities for science}, Author = {D.A. Washburn}, Date-Added = {2005-05-24 10:56:35 +0200}, Date-Modified = {2005-05-24 11:11:14 +0200}, Journal = {Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, & Computers}, Keywords = {video games, experimental psychology, data capture, analysis}, Number = {2}, Pages = {185-193}, Title = {The games psychologists play (and the data they provide)}, Url = {http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=PubMed&list_uids=12834073&dopt=Abstract}, Volume = {35}, Year = {2003}} @inproceedings{axup2005, Abstract = {Mobile phones are increasingly being used collaboratively by social networks of users in spite of the fact that they are primarily designed to support single users and one-to-one communication. It is not well understood how services such as group SMS, SMS-based discussion lists and mobile Instant Messaging (IM) will be used by mobile groups in natural settings. Studying specific instances of common styles of in situ, group interaction may provide a way to see behavior patterns and typical interaction problems. We conducted a study of a mobile, group communication probe used during a rendezvousing activity in an urban environment. Usability problems relating to group usage, phone interface design and context were identified. Several major issues included: multitasking during message composition and reading; speed of text entry; excessive demand on visual attention; and ambiguity of intended recipients. We suggest that existing mobile device designs are overly-focused on individual users to the detriment of usability for mobile groups of users. We provide recommendations for the design of future mobile, group interfaces, used in similar situations to those explored here.}, Address = {St. Louis, MO, USA}, Annote = {Axup, Viller and Bidwell studied how people used cell phones and a mobile discussion list (made up of SMS) to coordinate while rendezvousing. The discussion list prototype adequately supported the joint actions they users (group of 39 has to carry out. However, significant few problems arose. Since users had not location awareness tool they had to figure out the approximate location of their partners as well as developing a representation of the are being explored. Since teams did not see each other's location, sometimes they misattributed delays and formed inaccurate models of behavior/location. The authors found that the SMS discussion list they proposed is insufficient for rendezvousing for different reasons. One the one hand, the usability of the cell phone makes it difficult to see both messages being composed and incoming messages simultaneously. On the other hand, the lack of a map view and location awareness is also detrimental to the task. }, Author = {J. Axup and S. Viller and N. Bidwell}, Booktitle = {Proceedings of the Symposium on Collaborative Technologies and Systems - Special Session on Mobile Collaborative Work}, Date-Added = {2005-05-24 10:45:04 +0200}, Date-Modified = {2005-05-24 10:49:00 +0200}, Keywords = {rendezvousing, coordination, cell phone}, Month = {May 15-20}, Title = {Usability of a Mobile, Group Communication Prototype While Rendezvousing}, Url = {http://www.mobilecommunitydesign.com/research/Axup,Viller,Bidwell-Usability_of_a_Mobile,_Group_Communication_Prototype_While_Rendezvousing-pre-print.pdf}, Year = {2005}} @inproceedings{dearman2005, Abstract = {This paper presents an exploratory field study investigating the behavioral effects of mobile location-aware computing on rendezvousing. Participants took part in one of three mobile device conditions (a mobile phone, a location-aware handheld or both a mobile phone and a location-aware handheld) and completed different rendezvousing scenarios. We present one of the scenarios in depth and discuss the effect of location-awareness on rendezvous behaviour.}, Address = {New York, NY, USA}, Annote = {Interesting account of an field study. It investigates how location-aware technology impacts social behaviour within the context of rendezvousing (meeting at an agreed upon time and location). Three different technology conditions were investigated: Mobile phones / Location-aware handheld computers / Both mobile phones and location-aware handheld computers. Data was collected via field notes, audio recordings, data logging, questionnaires, and semi-structured interviews. Results: Regardless of the technology provided to the participants, all of the pairs were able to complete the rendezvous tasks without much difficulty. However, the results of this study clearly demonstrate that the participants exhibited very different behaviours depending on the technology used. (...) Mobile phones are an easy medium to assist people in communicating information about actions and intentions (i.e. `what are you are doing?' or `where are you planning to go?'). This information can be difficult to gather from sensor-based devices such as location-aware handhelds. In contrast, sensor-based devices are very good at gathering overt contextual information, such as location, in a very unobtrusive manner. However, they provide little assistance in interpreting the associated state of the person. In our study, when participants were given both devices, they easily recognized the strengths of each device and utilized each appropriately (i.e. monitoring their partner's location with the handheld and using the mobile phone to call when they were confused about what the person was doing).}, Author = {D. Dearman and K. Hawkey and K.M. Inkpen}, Booktitle = {Proceedings of the Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems CHI 2005}, Date-Added = {2005-05-19 11:25:42 +0200}, Date-Modified = {2005-05-19 12:07:52 +0200}, Keywords = {location-awareness, pda, rendezvousing}, Pages = {1929 - 1932}, Publisher = {ACM Press}, Title = {Effect of location-awareness on rendezvous behaviour}, Url = {http://portal.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=1056808.1057059&coll=GUIDE&dl=GUIDE&type=series&idx=1056808&part=Proceedings&WantType=Proceedings&title=Conference%20on%20Human%20Factors%20in%20Computing%20Systems&CFID=://www.google.com/search?client=safari&CFTOKEN=www.google.com/search?client=safari}, Year = {2005}} @article{laurier2001, Abstract = {In often-noticed feature of mobile phone calls is some form of 'geographical' locating after a greeting has been made. The author uses some singular instances of mobile phone conversations to provide an answer as to why this geolinguistic feature has emerged. In an examination of two real cases and a vignette, some light is shed on a more classical spatial topic, that of mobility. During the opening and closing statements of the paper a short critique is put forward of the 'professionalisation' of cultural studies and cultural geography and their ways of theorising ordinary activities. It is argued that a concern with theory construction effectively distances such workers from everyday affairs where ordinary actors understand in practical terms and account competently for what is going on in their worlds. This practical understanding is inherent in the intricacies of a conversational 'ordering', which is at one and the same time also an ordering of the times and spaces of these worlds. By means of an indifferent approach to the 'grand theories' of culture, some detailed understandings of social practices are offered via the alternatives of ethnomethodological and conversational investigations}, Annote = {The problem is that is focuses on mobile workers for whom location really makes sense, I would like to see a same study but with non-mobile person.}, Author = {E. Laurier}, Date-Added = {2004-11-25 15:27:06 +0100}, Date-Modified = {2004-11-25 15:30:20 +0100}, Journal = {Environment and Planning D: Society & Space}, Keywords = {location formulation, cell phone}, Number = {4}, Pages = {485-504}, Title = {Why people say where they are during mobile phone calls}, Url = {http://www.receiver.vodafone.com/07/articles/07_page01.html}, Volume = {19}, Year = {2001}} @inproceedings{consolvo2005, Abstract = {Advances in location-enhanced technology are making it easier for us to be located by others. These new technologies present a difficult privacy tradeoff, as disclosing one's location to another person or service could be risky, yet valuable. To explore whether and what users are willing to disclose about their location to social relations, we conducted a three-phased formative study. Our results show that the most important factors were who was requesting, why the requester wanted the participant's location, and what level of detail would be most useful to the requester. After determining these, participants were typically willing to disclose either the most useful detail or nothing about their location. From our findings, we reflect on the decision process for location disclosure. With these results, we hope to influence the design of future location-enhanced applications and services.}, Address = {Portland, Oregon, USA}, Annote = {The discussion is more related to privacy issues than communication theories. For instance it would have been relevant to look at the data with Sperber and Wilson's background.}, Author = {S. Consolvo and I.E. Smith and T. Matthews and A. Lamarca and J. Tabert and P. Powledge}, Booktitle = {Proceeding of the SIGCHI conference on Human factors in computing systems}, Date-Added = {2005-05-03 13:51:49 +0200}, Date-Modified = {2005-05-03 14:44:49 +0200}, Keywords = {location disclosure, privacy}, Organization = {ACM press: NY}, Pages = {81-90}, Title = {Location disclosure to social relations: why, when and what people want to share}, Url = {http://guir.berkeley.edu/pubs/chi2005/p486-consolvo.pdf}, Year = {2005}} @inproceedings{kakihara2004, Annote = {Some excerpts: This paper addresses one particular aspect of organisational life for mobile workers, the constant negotiation of fluid work, based on the assumption that an essential aspect of mobile work is the negotiation of desirable versus disruptive interaction. (...) In order to initiate the debate we ask the question: What are the pertinent issues involved in individuals negotiating mobile work? This is based on the assumption of temporary asymmetry between individual mobile workers in terms of fluid mobile work -- what for one person is a perfectly justifiable request can for another be a disruption. (...) [and the most relevant part with regard to my interests:] Establishment of mutual awareness of location has been promoted as an important element of mobile interaction (Maenpa, 2001), but also conflicting accounts of the awareness of activities as the primary element has been promoted (Weilenmann, 2001). However, in both cases, a generalised notion of location awareness is being negotiated since Weilenmann argues that the awareness of activity infers awareness of location. It can, therefore, be argued that the use of mobile phones, for example, socially constructs a location based services, both in terms of allowing constant update mutual awareness of locations, as well as in bringing the interaction to the location. Much research has discussed applying specific awareness technologies, AwareWare (Nilsson et al., 2000). The most common of these technologies is a stationary interaction technology in it's own right, namely Instant Messaging, where platforms such as ICQ allow participants explicitly to declare the interactional status. Other systems, such as the one reported by Nardi et al. (2000) supported implicit awareness by monitoring user keystroke rates and therefore enabling others to gain an impression of whether or not the person to be contacted is situated by their desk, or alternatively they perhaps is too busy to be contacted at all. Tang et al. (2001) demonstrate a multi-platform mobile awareness system with implicit location logging. Dix et al. (2000) suggest a generic systems architecture for mobile awareness technologies that integrates the technologies technical "awareness" of internal state with the inclusion of the external context to support mutual awareness between users. }, Author = {M. Kakihara and C. S{\o}rensen and M. Wiberg}, Booktitle = {The Interaction Society: Practice, Theories, & Supportive Technologies}, Date-Added = {2005-05-03 15:07:04 +0200}, Date-Modified = {2005-05-03 15:23:10 +0200}, Editor = {M. Wiberg}, Keywords = {CSCW, location awareness, mobile computing, werable computing, ubiquitous computing, augmented reality}, Title = {Negotiating the fluidity of mobile work}, Url = {http://mobility.lse.ac.uk/download/KakiharaSorensenWiberg2002.pdf}, Year = {2004}} @article{kallai2005, Abstract = {The present study characterized frequent motion patterns (search strategies) that occurred during spatial navigation in a virtual maze. The research focused on identifying and characterizing some search strategies, the temporal progression of strategy-use, and their role in spatial performance. Participants were 112 undergraduate students (42 males and 70 females). We identified three search strategies that predicted spatial performance. /Enfilading/ refers to an approach-withdrawal pattern of active exploration near a target location. /Thigmotaxis/ refers to a search strategy that involves continuous contact with the circular wall of the maze. /Visual scan/ involves active visual exploration while the subject remains in a fixed spatial location and turns round. In addition to identifying these motion patterns, some significant points of the spatial learning process were also detailed where strategies appeared to shift systematically. The applied search strategies in these transitional points have determined overall spatial performance.}, Author = {J. Kallai and T. Makany and K. Karadi and W.J. Jacobs}, Date-Added = {2005-04-19 10:42:33 +0200}, Date-Modified = {2005-04-19 10:44:34 +0200}, Journal = {Behavioural Brain Research}, Keywords = {spatial cognition, spatial strategies}, Number = {159}, Pages = {187-196}, Title = {Spatial orientation strategies in Morris-type virtual water task for humans}, Year = {2005}} @inproceedings{kenny1998, Address = {Boston}, Annote = {data analysis in social psychology (Kenny, Kashy and Bolger...) p233 - majors strides have been made in the analysis of data in which persons interact with or rate multiple players - nonindependence of observations is a serious issue that is often just ignored then ANOVA is limited - replacing ANOVA by structural equation modeling OR multilevel modeling - which unit of analysis should be chosen: individual or group? If person is used as unit of analysis, the assumptions of independence is likely to be violated because persons within groups may influence one another (Kenny and Judd, 1986). Alternatively, if group (= couple, team, organization...) is used, the power of the statistical tests is likely to be reduced because there are fewer degress of freedom than there are in the analysis that uses person as the unit of analysis. - concerning the independent variable (IV) A, there is three cases: nested (when groups are assigned to levels of the IV such that every member of a given group has the same score on A with some groups at one level of A and other groups at other levels of A), crossed (when A varies within the group with some member in one level of A and other group members in another level of A) and mixed (both nested and crossed). [I often use nested variables like in my masters thesis] - for nested IV: there is a method to measure the nonindependence of the data using the intraclass correlation. Group effects occur if the scors of individual within a group are more similar to one another than are the scores of individuals who are in different groups. The intraclass correlation can be viewed as the amount of variance in the persons' scores that is due to the group, controlling for the effects of A. When the intraclass correlation is not large and total sample size and the group size are small, power is very low. Using the ANOVA: this correlation is equal to (n= number of persons per group): (mean square for groups within A - mean square for individual within groups within A)/(mean square for groups within A + (n-1)*mean square for individual within groups within A) - Summary: safer to make group as unit of analysis and so it is then necessary to collect data from a sufficient number of groups. general guideline: if there is nonindependence, then group must be used as the unit of analyis; if there is independence, the individual may be the unit of analysis. The usual standard for "sufficient power" is having and 80 percent chance of rejecting the null hypothesis.}, Author = {D.A. Kenny and D. A. Kashy and N. Bolger}, Booktitle = {Handbook of social psychology}, Date-Added = {2005-03-31 14:18:44 +0200}, Date-Modified = {2005-03-31 14:22:14 +0200}, Editor = {D. Gilbert and S. Fiske and G. Lindzey}, Keywords = {small group research, social psychology, statistics}, Pages = {233-251}, Publisher = {McGraw-Hill}, Title = {Data analysis in social psychology}, Year = {1998}} @article{glaser2000, Abstract = {Abstract: Sketching is traditionally associated withdoodling simple strokes on a piece of paper.Only few professionals outside of design andthe fine arts have recognized the expressivepower of this intuitive modality. However,sketching seems particularly well suited tocapture objects and situations in a spatialenvironment, such as geographic space. To learnmore about the techniques and strategies peopleuse when sketching, a survey of sketching wasconducted. The study showed that paper andpencil sketches contain mostly simple andabstract objects that are composed of only fewstrokes. The spatial configuration of a sceneis primarily expressed through the topologicalordering of objects relative to each other.Metric relationships are used to refine spatialconfigurations. These and other findingssuggest that sketching is an appropriatemodality to interact with a computer where onewants to describe and capture objectconfigurations in a spatial environment, suchas a geographic information system (GIS). Keywords: freehand sketching - human computer interaction - human subject testing - multi-modal user interfaces - spatial querying - spatial information retrieval in GIS}, Annote = {The paper interestingly emphasizes that sketeching has not yet become a frequently used modality to interact with GIS. They collect and study sketching behavior, providing the reader with a classification of all the sketches (+annotations) they got.}, Author = {A.Glaser}, Date-Added = {2005-03-07 14:18:52 +0100}, Date-Modified = {2005-03-07 17:34:02 +0100}, Journal = {Spatial Cognition and Computation}, Keywords = {sketch, map annotation, GIS, analysis}, Pages = {393-419}, Title = {A study of people's sketching habits in GIS}, Url = {http://springerlink.metapress.com/app/home/contribution.asp?wasp=b0cyhcwhlm0kymajte27&referrer=parent&backto=issue,7,12;journal,1,8;linkingpublicationresults,1:103795,1}, Volume = {2}, Year = {2000}} @inproceedings{forbus2003, Abstract = {A serious barrier to the digitalization of the US military is that commanders find traditional mouse/menu, CAD-style interfaces unnatural. Military commanders develop and communicate battle plans by sketching courses of action (COAs). This paper describes nuSketch Battlespace, the latest version in an evolving line of sketching interfaces that commanders find natural, yet supports significant increased automation. We describe techniques that should be applicable to any specialized sketching domain: glyph bars and compositional symbols to tractably handle the large number of entities that military domains use, specialized glyph types and gestures to keep drawing tractable and natural, qualitative spatial reasoning to provide sketch-based visual reasoning, and comic graphs to describe multiple states and plans. Experiments, both completed and in progress, are described to provide evidence as to the utility of the system.}, Address = {Miami, Florida}, Annote = {"A serious barrier to the digitalization of the US military is that commanders find traditional mouse/menu, CAD-style interfaces unnatural. Military commanders develop and communicate battle plans by sketching courses of action (COAs)." "One task where sketching is used extensively is when military planners are formulating battle plans, called Courses of Action (COAs)" "A COA consists of a sketch and a textual statement. The sketch conveys a number of crucial properties of the situation and the plan. First, it includes a depiction of what terrain features are considered important. (Sometimes COAs are drawn on acetate overlays on maps, sometimes the basic terrain description itself is simply sketched.) The results of analyzing terrain, such as possible paths for movement (mobility corridors, avenues of approach) and good locations for different kinds of operations are identified. The disposition of troops and equipment, both for friendly (Blue) forces and what is known about the enemy (Red) forces is shown by means of unit symbols, a vocabulary of graphical symbols defined as part of US military doctrine. This graphical vocabulary also includes symbols for tasks, such as destroy, defend, attack, and so on. The COA sketch indicates a commander's plan in terms of the tasks that their units are assigned to do." "Today's speech systems have serious problems in noisy environments, especially when operators are under stress. " }, Author = {K.D. Forbus and J. Usher and V. Chapman}, Booktitle = {Proceedings of the 8th international conference on Intelligent user interfaces}, Date-Added = {2005-03-07 14:23:18 +0100}, Date-Modified = {2005-03-07 14:30:44 +0100}, Editor = {ACM Press: New York}, Keywords = {sketch, map annotation, analysis}, Month = {January}, Pages = {61-68}, Title = {Sketching for military courses of action diagrams}, Url = {http://www.qrg.northwestern.edu/papers/ Files/ForbusUsherChapmanIUI2003.pdf}, Year = {2003}} @inproceedings{nilsen2004, Abstract = {In Augmented Reality (AR), interfaces consist of a blend of both real and virtual content. In this paper we examine existing gaming styles played in the real world or on computers. We discuss the strengths and weaknesses of these mediums within an informal model of gaming experience split into four aspects; physical, mental, social and emotional. We find that their strengths are mostly complementary, and argue that games built in AR can blend them to enhance existing game styles and open up new ones. To illustrate these ideas, we present our work on AR Worms, a re-implementation of the classic computer game Worms using Augmented Reality. We discuss how AR has enabled us to start exploring interfaces for gaming, and present informal observations of players at several demonstrations. Finally, we present some ideas for AR games in the area of strategy and role playing games. }, Address = {Dunedin, New Zealand}, Annote = {This paper is interesting because it expresses why augmented reality games worth it. It is basically because of the feeling of immersion they provide: physical, social, emotional and mental. This might be useful to discuss the relevance of using games in HCI.}, Author = {R. Nilsen and S. Linton and J. Looser}, Booktitle = {Proceedings of the New Zealand Game Developers Conference NZGDC2004}, Date-Added = {2005-01-26 17:05:42 +0100}, Date-Modified = {2005-01-26 17:13:54 +0100}, Keywords = {augmented reality, motivations, game}, Month = {26-29 June}, Organization = {FUSE}, Pages = {86-93}, Title = {Motivations for Augmented Reality Gaming}, Url = {http://www.hitlabnz.org/fileman_store/ 2004-NZGDC-MotivationsARGaming.pdf}, Year = {2004}} @article{ciolfi2004, Annote = {This short paper focuses on some issues involved in the design of Ubiquitous Technologies andtheir integration within physical spaces. Current design methodologies and techniques do not explicitly consider the importance of gaining a full understanding of human experience of spacewhen designing technologies that will pervade and become part of our physical environment. Ourproposal is specifically focused on the importance of considering spaces as places, and analysing those features of a place that are going to shape users' interaction with technologically enhancedenvironments. We also attempt to clarify some future implications that these concerns may haveon theoretical and methodological aspects of Interaction Design. }, Author = {L. Ciolfi}, Date-Added = {2005-01-25 14:29:56 +0100}, Date-Modified = {2005-01-25 14:36:40 +0100}, Journal = {Cognition, Technology and Work, Special Issue on "Presence: design and technology challenges for cooperative activities in virtual or remote environments"}, Keywords = {space and place, social interactions, HCI, mobile computing}, Number = {1}, Pages = {37-40}, Title = {Understanding Spaces as Places: Extending Interaction Design Paradigms}, Url = {http://richie.idc.ul.ie/luigina/PapersPDFs/CTW_LC_CR.pdf&e=7207}, Volume = {64}, Year = {2004}} @inproceedings{erickson1993, Abstract = {Today's human-computer interfaces are cumbersome, sterile, and uninviting; they stand in stark contrast to the richness and depth of the everyday world. The thesis of this paper is that spatial environments have great potential as interface metaphors, particularly as computers begin to serve as a medium through which human-human interaction occurs. One section of the paper focuses on ways in which MUDs--text-based, multi-user dialog systems--use spatial metaphors to support social interaction. Then the paper examines how real spaces structure and enrich human interaction, drawing on observations from the literature on urban design, landscape architecture, and related disciplines. Ultimately, we hope that a better understanding of these issues can lead to the development of spatially-based interfaces which support human-human interaction.}, Address = {Heidelberg: Springer-Verlag}, Annote = {The author underlined the very notion of the importance of considering spaces as place (nothing's new since Harrison and Dourish, 1996), and analysing those features of a place that are going to shape users' interaction}, Author = {T. Erickson}, Booktitle = {Proceedings of Conference on Spatial Information Theory}, Date-Added = {2005-01-25 11:28:54 +0100}, Date-Modified = {2005-01-25 11:40:03 +0100}, Keywords = {space and place, social interactions, HCI}, Title = {From Interface to Interplace: The Spatial Environment as a Medium for Interaction}, Url = {http://www.pliant.org/personal/Tom_Erickson/Interplace.html}, Year = {1993}} @inproceedings{benford2004, Abstract = {The use of positioning systems is an important but problematic aspect of `context aware' applications. Through focusing on location-based games, we introduce the approach of self-reported positioning in which players explicitly and implicitly reveal their positions by manipulating electronic maps. A study of a game that piloted this approach demonstrates that self-reported positioning can be a reliable low-tech alternative to automated systems such as GPS. We contrast the strategies used by humans to generate position updates -- reporting at landmarks and junctions and ahead and behind themselves -- with automated approaches, drawing out implications for how we think of positioning error and design positioning systems. }, Address = {Nottingham}, Annote = {Interesting because it deals with uncertainty about how LBS report people's location}, Author = {S. Benford and W. Seagar and M. Flintham and R. Anastasi and D. Rowland and J. Humble and D. Stanton and J. Bowers and N. Tandavanitj and M. Adams and J. Row Farr and A. Oldroyd and J. Sutton}, Booktitle = {Proceedings of the the 6th International Conference on Ubiquitous Computing. (UbiComp 2004)}, Date-Added = {2005-01-10 17:31:30 +0100}, Date-Modified = {2005-01-10 17:40:05 +0100}, Month = {September}, Pages = {70-87}, Title = {The Error of our Ways: The experience of Self-Reported Position in a Location-Based Game}, Url = {http://www.sics.se/~humble/publications/error_of_our_ways.pdf}, Year = {2004}} @inproceedings{brown2005, Abstract = {While ethnographic methods are an established tool for requirements analysis in Human Computer Interaction (HCI) and Computer Supported Collaborative Work (CSCW), they have seldom been used for the design of electronic map systems. This chapter presents an ethnographic study of city tourists' practices that draws out a number of implications for designing map technologies. We describe how tourists work together in groups, collaborate around maps and guidebooks, and both `pre-' and `postvisit' places. These findings have been used in the design of the `george square' system which allows tourists to collaborate around an electronic map at a distance.}, Annote = {I particulary appreciate the definition of a map as a collaborative artifact. From an observatory poitn of view, it's always fun to see people collaborate from the beginning (unfolding the map), the core of the task (finding something on the map) and the end (folding the map). Thsi ritual is fantastic! Besides, this paper is useful since it analyses how people collaboratively make senses of maps. This then gives ideas about how designing locative applications based on maps.}, Author = {B. Brown and E. Laurier}, Booktitle = {Map-based mobile services -- Theories, Methods and Implementations}, Date-Added = {2005-01-19 15:02:37 +0100}, Date-Modified = {2005-01-19 15:04:05 +0100}, Editor = {L. Meng and A. Zipf and T. Reichenbache}, Keywords = {maps, electronic maps, ethnography}, Publisher = {Springer-Verlag: Berlin}, Title = {Designing electronic maps: an ethnographic approach}, Url = {http://www.dcs.gla.ac.uk/~barry/papers/mapbookFinal.pdf}, Year = {2005}} @inproceedings{nova2001b, Author = {N. Nova and N. Guin-Duclosson}, Booktitle = {Sciences et techniques {\'e}ducatives}, Date-Added = {2005-01-06 10:36:56 +0100}, Date-Modified = {2005-01-06 10:42:28 +0100}, Month = {Avril}, Publisher = {Herm{\`e}s : Paris}, Title = {Adapter l'aide {\`a} l'apprenant : utilisation de connaissances abstraites ou contextualis{\'e}es.}, Volume = {1-2}, Year = {2001}} @inproceedings{brown2003b, Abstract = {Museums attract increasing numbers of online visitors along with their conventional physical visitors. This paper presents a study of a mixed reality system that allows web, virtual reality and physical visitors to share a museum visit together in real time. Our system allows visitors to share their location and orientation, communicate over a voice channel, and jointly navigate around a shared information space. Results from a study of 34 users of the system show that visiting with the system was highly interactive and retained many of the attractions of a traditional shared exhibition visit. Specifically, users could navigate together, collaborate around objects and discuss exhibits. These findings have implications for non-museum settings, in particular how location awareness is a powerful resource for collaboration, and how 'hybrid objects' can support collaboration at-a-distance.}, Address = {Fort Lauderdale, Florida}, Annote = {These findings have implications for non-museum settings, in particular how location awareness is a powerful resource for collaboration. (...) Shared awareness of location also allowed users to quickly move to their friends. Participants used this to quickly find what their friends were looking at and then move so as to look at the same thing. (...) Location awareness allowed participants to talk about and use each other's context and navigation (...) Awareness of location also meant that users could better understand what their co-visitors were looking at; each could simply look at the map or 3D display, and see which exhibits the others were viewing. Location awareness might be similarly useful for other collaborative settings where current activity can be inferred from location}, Author = {B.Brown and I.McColl and M.Chalmers and A.Galani and C.Randell and A.Steed}, Booktitle = {Proceedings of the CHI 2003 Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems}, Date-Added = {2005-01-04 15:17:52 +0100}, Date-Modified = {2005-01-04 15:27:19 +0100}, Keywords = {mixed reality, location-awareness, context-awareness, museum setting}, Pages = {577-584}, Publisher = {ACM Press: NY}, Title = {Lessons from the Lighthouse: Collaboration in a Shared Mixed Reality System}, Url = {http://www.dcs.gla.ac.uk/~barry/papers/CHIlighthousepaper.pdf}, Year = {2003}} @inproceedings{nova2002, Address = {Manchester, UK}, Author = {N. Nova}, Booktitle = {Proceedings of "Playing with the Future" Conference}, Date-Added = {2005-01-06 10:39:30 +0100}, Date-Modified = {2005-01-06 10:42:12 +0100}, Keywords = {awarness tool, video games}, Pages = {48}, Title = {Awareness Tools : Lessons from First-Person Shooter Games}, Year = {2002}} @article{cherubini2004, Author = {M. Cherubini and N. Nova}, Date-Added = {2005-01-06 10:44:55 +0100}, Date-Modified = {2005-01-06 10:46:17 +0100}, Journal = {Imago Urbis}, Title = {To Live or To Master the city, the citizen dilemma: some reflections on urban spaces fruition and on the possibility of change one's attitude}, Url = {http://imagourbis.unq.edu.ar/}, Year = {2004}} @inproceedings{kjeldskov2003b, Abstract = {This paper examines and reviews research methods applied within the field of mobile human-computer interaction. The purpose is to provide a snapshot of current practice for studying mobile HCI to identify shortcomings in the way research is conducted and to propose opportunities for future approaches. 102 publications on mobile human-computer interaction research were categorized in a matrix relating their research methods and purpose. The matrix revealed a number of significant trends with a clear bias towards building systems and evaluating them only in laboratory settings, if at all. Also, gaps in the distribution of research approaches and purposes were identified; action research, case studies, field studies and basic research being applied very infrequently. Consequently, we argue that the bias towards building systems and a lack of research for understanding design and use limits the development of cumulative knowledge on mobile human computer interaction. This in turn inhibits future development of the research field as a whole. }, Address = {Udine, Italy}, Annote = {A meta-review of the techniques employed to evaluate mobile computing devices - One researcher read and classified the 102 selected research papers in relation to their method and purpose - A second researcher blindly read and classified 20 randomly selected papers - Due to disparities, all papers were then discussed one by one in collaboration between the researchers, resulting in a final classification This reveals a tendency towards environment independent research and artificial setting research{\ldots} at the expense of natural setting research. This reveals a tendency towards building systems based on trial and error, evaluating systems in controlled environments (if at all) {\ldots} at the expense of studying real use of systems.Little research addresses the question of what is useful and what is percieved problematic from a user perspective. It seems assumed that we already know what systems to build and what problems to overcome (given the youth of the research field, this can hardly be true/The prevalent focus on applied research makes it difficult to set aside this assumption/On the contrary, it could be stated that mobile HCI in particular requires research addressing this issue). It seems also assumed that teal world studies are not very important (building and evaluating systems on the basis of applied research and laboratory experiments results in very concrete conclusions about specific solutions/Such conclusions can be difficult to generalize). Finally, methodology matters very little The author then proposes different research avenue: - Field and case studies for informing engineering through exploration of real use contexts - Survey research for studying use of mobile technology in the hands of a large segment - Action Research for developing knowledge through practice and intervention - Basic research for developing theoretical understanding of the studied phenomena}, Author = {J.Kjeldskov and C.Graham}, Booktitle = {Proceedings of the 5th International Mobile HCI 2003 conference}, Date-Added = {2005-01-04 14:52:42 +0100}, Date-Modified = {2005-01-04 14:56:11 +0100}, Keywords = {mobile computing, evaluation}, Pages = {317-335}, Publisher = {Springer-Verlag: Berlin}, Title = {A Review of MobileHCI Research Methods}, Url = {http://www.cs.aau.dk/~jesper/papers/MobileHCI03-final.pdf}, Year = {2003}} @inproceedings{nova2003c, Address = {Luzern, Switzerland}, Author = {N. Nova and T. Wehrle and J. Goslin and Y. Bourquin and P. Dillenbourg}, Booktitle = {Proceedings of International Conference on New Education Environments}, Date-Added = {2005-01-06 10:46:35 +0100}, Date-Modified = {2005-01-06 11:01:33 +0100}, Editor = {C. Jutz and F. Fl{\"u}ckiger K. W{\"a}fler}, Month = {May 26-28}, Pages = {83-88}, Title = {Awareness Tools and Mutual Modelling in a Collaborative Game}, Year = {2003}} @inproceedings{goodman2004, Abstract = {This paper discusses the experimental evaluation of location-based services, such as mobile guides, in the field. It identifies advantages and disadvantages of using such field experiments over and against other evaluation methods. We then describe a specific method of running field experiments that we have found to be useful. The use of various evaluation measures, tools and scales is then discussed, based on our experiences with them. These include timings, errors, perceived workload, distance travelled and percentage preferred walking speed (PPWS).}, Address = {Glasgow, UK}, Annote = {A very smart paper that set the concept of 'field experiment'. It's closely related to the notion of ``quasi-experiment'' developed by T.D. Cook, D.T. Campbell, Quasi-Experimentation: Design and Analysis Issues in Field Settings, Rand McNally, Chicago, 1979. I liked the table that explains the measure/what does it tell us/how is it measured. Field experiments are quantitative experimental evaluations that are carried out in the field, drawing from aspects of both qualitative field studies and lab experiments. To start with, field experiments have advantages over expert evaluations (such as heuristic evaluations and checklists) because they involve real users. This is particularly important when studying novel, variable and less understood situations, such as those involved in mobile devices. Secondly, there are various reasons for preferring field situations to laboratory settings. Principally, the difference between use in a laboratory setting, even when mobile conditions are simulated, and use in the real world can be quite startling. This is particularly true for devices such as mobile guides that rely heavily on the surrounding environment. Aspects such as lighting levels, weather, the effects of walking, the appearance of landmarks in real life and the effectiveness of location-sensing systems can have unpredictable effects on the usability and effectiveness of a device. The only way to really see how the device will work in practice is to use it in practice. In addition, field experiments have various advantages over more qualitative and ethnographic field studies. Although such field studies do have some advantages, it can be hard to use them to obtain an objective evaluation of a device, determine its performance or gain hard evidence comparing one device or method with another. Field experiments offer one way to overcome these disadvantages while still utilizing the advantages of a field setting. They are also quicker than carrying out a fullblown ethnographic field study and can gauge the responses of a greater number of participants.}, Author = {J.Goodman and S.Brewster and P.Gray}, Booktitle = {HCI in Mobile Guides, workshop at Mobile HCI 2004}, Date-Added = {2005-01-03 13:55:15 +0100}, Date-Modified = {2005-01-03 14:22:02 +0100}, Editor = {Schmidt-Belz, B. and Cheverst, K.}, Keywords = {mobile computing, evaluation, field experiment}, Month = {September}, Title = {Using Field Experiments to Evaluate Mobile Guides}, Url = {http://www.dcs.gla.ac.uk/~joy/research/2004_mobile_guides/paper.pdf}, Year = {2004}} @inproceedings{kjeldskov2003a, Abstract = {This paper addresses the issue of creating a realistic laboratory setting when evaluating the usability of mobile systems. Three laboratory-based think-aloud evaluations of the same mobile system were designed and conducted for the purpose of comparing the impact of different approaches to creating realistic laboratory environments on the results subsequently produced. The three evaluations spanned the use of test subjects with and without domain specific knowledge and the use of low and high fidelity simulations of the use context. The results show similarities and differences in the results of the three evaluations. First, an equal number of usability problems are identified in the evaluations, and a standard laboratory involving non-domain subjects can identify severe problems. On the other hand, employing domain test subjects in a simulated laboratory seems to generate some additional problems which would be difficult to identify in the standard laboratory. }, Address = {Z{\"u}rich, Switzerland}, Annote = {The authors adresse the topic of mobile devices usability using 'realistic laboratory settings'. They advocate for the use of lab settings because of various constraints like "mobile systems for highly specialized use contexts such as e.g. safety-critical or hazardous environments may prohibit exploratory usability evaluations since errors involving risks for people and equipment cannot be tolerated". They exemplifiy this issue by presenting the work they carried out to evaluate a mobile device used for coordination on large container vessels. They used 3 different experimental settings: - in a standard usability laboratory (mockup...mirror/camera...) with non domain subjects - in a standard usability laboratory (mockup...mirror/camera...) with domain subjects - in an 'advanced lab' (room with ship simulator) with domain subjects They identified different usability problems. Even though it seems interesting (with regard to the number of problems that emerged), it is a bit crazy to notice that the authors evaluate a MOBILE device in a NON-MOBILE situation! They cite this limit at the end of the paper but I do think it's a real drawback that should not be left as a side critic!}, Author = {J.Kjeldskov and M.B.Skov}, Booktitle = {Proceedings of the 9th IFIP TC13 International Conference on Human Computer Interaction, Interact 2003}, Date-Added = {2005-01-03 10:19:42 +0100}, Date-Modified = {2005-01-03 10:48:16 +0100}, Keywords = {Evaluation, usability, mobile systems, safety-critical, think-aloud}, Pages = {663-670}, Publisher = {IOS Press}, Title = {Creating Realistic Laboratory Settings: Comparative Studies of Three Think-Aloud Usability Evaluations of a Mobile System}, Url = {http://www.cs.aau.dk/~jesper/papers/Interact03-comparativeEvaluations-final.pdf}, Year = {2003}} @book{tufte2001, Annote = { 1. graphical practice 1.1 graphical excellence graphical display should - show the data. - induce the viewer to think about the substance rather than about methodology, design or something else. - avoid distorting the data story. Be truthful in the representation. - encourage the eye to compare different pieces of data. - make large data sets coherent. - encourage the eye to compare different pieces of data. - reveal the data at several levels of detail, from a broad overview to the fine structure. - serve a reasonably clear purpose: description, exploration, tabulation or decoration - be closely integrated with the statistical and verbal descriptions of a data set. 3 differents kinds of graphicas (historically, the first graphics shows an analogy to the physical world: space/time through map and time series): - data maps: lots of data, small space, different levels of analysis (overall contemplation... detection of details), patterns appear. - time-series: at their best for big data sets with variabilty (no linear changes), JH Lambert and W.Playfair are inventors of modern graphical design, small/non-comparative/highly labelled data sets belongs in tables (and not in graphics), problem: the passage of time is NOT a good explanatory variable (there are exceptions), time-series plot can be moved towards causal explanation by smuggling additional variables into the graphic design, or with a before/after (some event) time series. - narrative graphics of space and time: add spatial dimensions to the design of the graphic, so that the data are moving over space as well as over time. - more abstract design: relation graphics: no longer analogy with the physical world, one factor is palced in relationship to another one, measured for the same unit of observation, it links at least 2 variables, encouraging the viewer to assess the possible causal relationship between the plotted variables. }, Author = {E.Tufte}, Date-Added = {2004-12-27 17:49:22 +0100}, Date-Modified = {2004-12-27 17:52:53 +0100}, Keywords = {information visualization, graphics}, Publisher = {Graphics Press}, Title = {The Visual Display of Quantitative Information}, Year = {2001}} @inproceedings{nova2004, Address = {EPFL, Lausanne, Switerzland}, Author = {N. Nova and P. Dillenbourg}, Booktitle = {Position paper for the workshop "Spatial Awareness in Collaboration and Group Interaction"}, Date-Added = {2005-01-06 11:03:56 +0100}, Date-Modified = {2005-01-06 11:04:52 +0100}, Month = {October}, Title = {Impacts of Location-Awareness on Group Collaboration}, Url = {http://craftsrv1.epfl.ch/~cherubini/extranet/lausanne-workshop/papers/CSCLworkshopNova.pdf}, Year = {2004}} @inproceedings{nova2004b, Address = {Leeds, Uk}, Author = {N. Nova and F. Girardin}, Booktitle = {Position paper for "Games and Social Networks: A Workshop on Multiplayer Games"}, Date-Added = {2005-01-06 11:04:59 +0100}, Date-Modified = {2005-01-06 11:06:21 +0100}, Month = {September}, Title = {Analysis of a Location-Based Multi-Player Game}, Url = {http://www.dcs.gla.ac.uk/equator/gamesworkshop/papers/Nova-Leeds.pdf}, Year = {2004}} @inproceedings{kjeldskov2004, Abstract = {Evaluating the usability of mobile systems raises new concerns and questions, challenging methods for both lab and field evaluations. A recent literature study showed that most mobile HCI research projects apply lab-based evaluations. Nevertheless, several researchers argue in favour of field evaluations as mobile systems are highly context-dependent. However, field-based usability studies are difficult to conduct, time consuming and the added value is unknown. Contributing to this discussion, this paper compares the results produced by a laboratory- and a field-based evaluation of the same context-aware mobile system on their ability to identify usability problems. Six test subjects used the mobile system in a laboratory while another six used the system in the field. The results show that the added value of conducting usability evaluations in the field is very little and that recreating central aspects of the use context in a laboratory setting enables the identification of the same usability problem list.}, Annote = {a bit too optimistic}, Author = {J.Kjeldskov and M.B.Skov and B.S.Als and R.T.H{\o}egh}, Booktitle = {Proceedings of the 6th International Mobile HCI 2004 conference}, Date-Added = {2004-12-24 12:44:39 +0100}, Date-Modified = {2004-12-24 12:50:52 +0100}, Keywords = {mobile computing, evaluation}, Pages = {61-73}, Publisher = {Springer-Verlag: Berlin}, Title = {Is it Worth the Hassle? Exploring the Added Value of Evaluating the Usability of Context-Aware Mobile Systems in the Field}, Url = {http://www.cs.aau.dk/~jesper/papers/MobileHCI04-final.pdf}, Year = {2004}} @inproceedings{bardram2003, Abstract = {Local mobility is a central aspect of collaborative work that is in need of close analysis. Between the face-to-face interaction of offices or control rooms and longdistance interaction facilitated through e.g. telephones, e-mail, the www or teleconferences lie a number of work-settings in which actors move about continuously in order to accomplish their work. They do so because they need to get access to knowledge, resources, persons and/or places. We analyze the integral nature of mobility to this kind of work practice from the ethnographic description of a hospital department, and the challenges that actors have to face to accomplish their work. Based on this ethnographic case, we propose a set of concepts for understanding local mobility as an intermediate field of distributed cooperation between centres of coordination and remote collaboration. Finally, we introduce the concept of `mobility work' as complementary to the concept of `articulation work'. }, Address = {Helsinki, Finland}, Author = {J.E.Bardram and C.Bossen}, Booktitle = {Proceedings of the Eighth European Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work (CSCW'2003)}, Date-Added = {2004-12-22 13:51:57 +0100}, Date-Modified = {2004-12-22 14:10:32 +0100}, Editor = {Kari Kuutti at al.}, Keywords = {mobility, collaboration}, Pages = {355-374}, Publisher = {Kluwer Academic Publishers: Dordrecht}, Title = {Moving to get ahead: Local mobility and collaborative work}, Url = {http://www.pervasive.dk/publications/ files/Jakob.Bardram.ECSCW03.pdf}, Year = {2003}} @inproceedings{luff1998, Abstract = {This paper addresses an issue that has received little attention within CSCW - the requirements to support mobility within collaboration activities. By examining three quite different settings each with differing technological support, we examine the ways in which mobility is critical to collaborative work. We suggest that taking mobility seriously, may not only contribute our understanding of current support for collaboration, but raise more general issues concerning the requirements for mobile and other technologies.}, Address = {Seattle, USA}, Annote = {seminal paper about mobile collaboration}, Author = {P.Luff and C.Heath}, Booktitle = {Proceedings of the ACM conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work 98}, Date-Added = {2004-12-22 13:27:47 +0100}, Date-Modified = {2004-12-22 13:31:32 +0100}, Keywords = {mobility, collaboration}, Organization = {ACM press: NY}, Pages = {305-314}, Title = {Mobility in Collaboration}, Url = {http://www.kcl.ac.uk/depsta/pse/mancen/witrg/pdf/mobility.pdf}, Year = {1998}} @inproceedings{juhlin2001, Abstract = {This paper seeks to inform the ongoing redesign of air traffic management by examining current practices and the adoption of a new system aiming to relieve traffic control from work and reduce radio communication. We report from ethnographic fieldwork among mobile, distributed airport ground personnel. By examining the ways in which they use the `old' technology, i.e. VHF radio, we identify a set of important aspects of work carried out through radio talk. These are: repairing misunderstandings, discussing the task-at-hand, and negotiating next actions. The new system fails to support this negotiation work, and is hardly ever used by the ground personnel. The distributed workers in the field make their own decisions and negotiate coordination with the tower based on local information. In this respect, current work practice is already decentralized to a certain extent. The problem with the new system, we argue, is the idea to decentralize the organization by providing distributed workers with more information, whereas the current institutional arrangement for coordination is built upon highly formal and hierarchical ideas. When redesigning the system it is necessary to take into account the ways in which radio talk is used to carry out the everyday work among ground personnel. }, Author = {O.Juhlin and A.Weilenmann}, Booktitle = {Proceedings of the Seventh European Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work (ECSCW 2001)}, Date-Added = {2004-12-22 13:31:59 +0100}, Date-Modified = {2004-12-22 13:34:54 +0100}, Editor = {Prinz, W et al.}, Keywords = {mobile collaboration, coordination}, Pages = {379-397}, Publisher = {Kluwer Academic Publishers: Dordreicht}, Title = {Decentralizing the Control Room: Mobile Work and Institutional Order}, Url = {http://www.tii.se/mobility/Files/ecscw-presentationen.PDF}, Year = {2001}} @techreport{persson2002, Abstract = {Much of context-aware application research has dealt with the technical aspects of context capturing and how to interpret the context of a user. Little effort, however, has been spent on the experience and usage of these systems. This paper describes a real-use study of a location-aware community system - GeoNotes. Over the one-month trial, 78 users published 283 information items connected to indoor and outdoor places. Users found present people, synchronous situations and activities more interesting to `tag' than physical objects. Chat turned out to be the major activity in the system. In finding new notes at a place, users found the number of comments pivotal. GeoNotes was conceptualized in terms of newsgroup and IM applications. Implications for design are discussed. }, Annote = {Since it's based on declarative label of location, GeoNotes offers interesting things: Although not confirmed, 2 labels appeared to be faked (``England'' and ``centralen'' [normally designating a metro station far from Kista]).}, Author = {P.Persson and P.Fagerberg}, Date-Added = {2004-12-21 15:35:30 +0100}, Date-Modified = {2004-12-21 15:41:32 +0100}, Institution = {SICS, University of G{\"o}teborg, Sweden}, Keywords = {locative media, evaluation, spatial annotation}, Number = {SICS-T--2002/27-SE}, Title = {Geonotes: a real-use study of a public location-aware community system}, Url = {http://www.dsv.su.se/~petra/techReport.pdf}, Year = {2002}} @inproceedings{guttler2003, Abstract = {Basing itself on a theoretical discussion and experiments, this paper outlines the basic spatial principles of level design in multi-player first-person shooters with special reference to Counter-Strike (Sierra). In this manner, the paper seeks to outline a heuristics of level design in firstperson shooters. The thesis of the paper is that a consistent examination of a game's gameplay, its agents, and spatial components is necessary for the development of a design method that will lead to ultimate level design. Setting off from a theoretical discussion of the terms gameplay and emergence, the paper starts by establishing some basic characteristics of multiplayer shooters. The concept of emergence leads to a distinction of the unique features of multi-play and teamplay, and notions of gameplay help us to map out the basic spatial properties of the game environment and its staging of player strategies and tactical choice. The key concept in the principles of spatiality in level design advanced here is the socalled collision point; the location that marks the clash of players and hence by the set of relevant tactical choices to be made by the teams. To demonstrate the empirical basis and possible application in practical level design, the paper provides an analysis of a demonstrate the pros and cons of various design solutions and point at the basic spatial principles referred to above. The paper affirms that it does make sense to regard level design as tool for controlling the gameplay and the game's progression. Also it affirms that it is possible by means of a critical and systematical approach to distinguish between good and bad level-design. Thus a set of heuristics is suggested as a set of guidelines that could lead to better leveldesign for practitioners.}, Address = {Redwood City, California}, Author = {C.Guttler and T.D.Johansson}, Booktitle = {roceedings of the 2nd workshop on Network and system support for game}, Date-Added = {2004-12-14 15:09:04 +0100}, Date-Modified = {2004-12-14 15:12:14 +0100}, Keywords = {space, video game, analysis}, Pages = {158-170}, Publisher = {ACM Press: New York}, Title = {Spatial principles of level-design in multi-player first-person shooters}, Url = {http://portal.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=963915&jmp=abstract&dl=GUIDE&dl=GUIDE}, Year = {2003}} @article{smailagic2001, Abstract = {This paper defines an activity/attention framework for context aware computing, and categorizes several applications we have developed in spatial and temporal contexts. These context aware applications utilize the services from the activity/attention framework. The paper also introduces a generic architecture for pervasive computing, explores and refines its design space, and describes specific instantiations of the architecture and provides initial evaluation of these applications. }, Annote = {These authors have proposed a distraction matrix in which they classify the time needed for a distraction (from a snap (extremely small amount of time) to an extended time) and look at the categories of information, communication, and creation with respect to these distractions. }, Author = {A.Smailagic and D.P.Siewiorek and J.Anhalt and F.Gemperle and D.Salber and S.Weber and J.Beck and J.Jennings}, Date-Added = {2004-12-14 11:35:48 +0100}, Date-Modified = {2004-12-14 11:39:30 +0100}, Journal = {IEEE Journal on Intelligent Systems}, Keywords = {mobile computing, evaluation, distraction}, Month = {June}, Number = {3}, Pages = {38-46}, Title = {Towards Context Aware Computing: Experiences and Lessons Learned}, Url = {http://www.cs.cmu.edu/~asim/DistractionFreeComputing.pdf}, Volume = {16}, Year = {2001}} @techreport{roto2004, Abstract = {While increasingly better tools are available for examining human-computer interaction in a laboratory environment, we are only just starting to develop the methods and appropriate portable equipment within the mobile context. One problematic issue has been that current methods are not suited for attempting to establish causal relationships between context variables and interaction. In this paper we describe an experimental method, called quasiexperiment, and apparatus for recording mobile phone usage and the environment in a mobile context. Quasi-experimentation is based on 1) the best possible control over nuisance variables in the mobile test environment and 2) recordings of the user, interaction with the device, and the environment. It requires changes in the way we design, prepare, implement, and analyze interaction experiments. We learned that conducting a quasi-experiment is laborious without special tools that would decrease the amount of manual work. Quasiexperimentation is a promising investigation and evaluation methodology for the developers of mobile computing systems and applications. }, Author = {V.Roto and A.Oulasvirta and T.Haikarainen and J.Kuorelahti and H.Lehmuskallio and T.Nyyssonen}, Date-Added = {2004-12-13 16:28:53 +0100}, Date-Modified = {2004-12-13 16:32:41 +0100}, Institution = {HIIT Technical Report 2004-1}, Keywords = {mobility, collaboration, evaluation}, Title = {Examining Mobile Phone Use in the Wild with Quasi-Experimentation (.pdf). August 13, 2004.}, Url = {http://www.hiit.fi/publications/pub_files/hiit2004-1.pdf}, Year = {2004}} @inproceedings{scholtz2001, Author = {J.Scholtz and M.Herman and S.Laskowski and A.Smailagic}, Booktitle = {UbiComp `01}, Date-Added = {2004-12-14 12:05:53 +0100}, Date-Modified = {2004-12-14 12:08:36 +0100}, Keywords = {mobile computing, evaluation}, Title = {Workshop on Evaluation Methodologies for Ubiquitous Computing}, Url = {http://zing.ncsl.nist.gov/ubicomp01/}, Year = {2001}} @techreport{crabtree2003a, Annote = {Can You See Me Now? (Flintham et al. 2003) is a mixed reality mobile game where online players are chased and captured by runners located on the physical streets of a city, in this case, in Rotterdam.Interaction between players and runners is supported behind-thescenes by control room staff, who are responsible for managing the technology and (wherever possible) any troubles that occur. The purpose of this study is to inform a broad evaluation of the game's deployment in the wild, in contrast to in a controlled environment such as the laboratory, for example. ({\ldots}) Various strategies are employed to evaluate Can You See Me Now? ranging from statistical analysis of computer logs to ethnographic observation of the game's production, which is the particular focus of this report.}, Author = {A.Crabtree}, Date-Added = {2004-12-13 15:24:38 +0100}, Date-Modified = {2004-12-13 15:36:06 +0100}, Institution = {Equator Technical Report}, Keywords = {mobility, collaboration, evaluation}, Title = {Informing the Evaluation of Can You See Me Now? in Rotterdam: Runners' and Control Room Work}, Url = {www.equator.ac.uk/PublicationStore/ CYSMN_Rotterdam_Final.pdf}, Year = {2003}} @article{relieu2002, Annote = {Nice paper in french about how people give their location during phone calls: He used a vocal server to store mobile phone conversation. The study aimed at studying what mobile phone changed in phone conversation, especially with respect to location information. His point is that by allowing people to call from lots of places, the likelihood of talking about space increases. He explains that asking the other's whereabout is a common social norm and focus on two "location events": - asking or giving one's location at the begining of the phone interaation - giving one's location at the end of the phone interaation - conversations dedicated to location Relieu has also a nice take on using mobile phone when people are in the vicinity or very close. It could be used to improve coordination ot to make it more accurate, especially in problem solving activities (like finding a person in a city) -> cell phone for mutual guiding -> adjusting people's location in order to allow the meeting. People who communicate give their respective location while keep moving in the city. The phone call allow them to identify those location based on a shared geographical/topological knwoledge of the city. He also argues that we should not attribute functions (like availability of the called person, coordination or social control) to localization per se. Those localization must be situated in the on-going activity (which is true: if you know that a nurse is in a surgery room, there is 90{\%} that she is involved in a surgery act and hence unavailable to talk).}, Author = {M.Relieu}, Date-Added = {2004-12-13 16:37:37 +0100}, Date-Modified = {2004-12-13 16:39:18 +0100}, Journal = {Reseaux}, Keywords = {space and place, context, ethnography, social organisation}, Number = {112-113}, Pages = {19-47}, Title = {Ouvrir la bo{\^i}te noire. Identification et localisation dans les conversations mobiles}, Volume = {20}, Year = {2002}} @article{salembier2004, Abstract = {Mutual intelligibility and shared context. Conceptual inspirations and technological reductions Historically, theoretical frameworks that are used in order to provide a conceptual base to the computer-supported cooperative work refer mainly to the "situated action" approach, and consequently to one of its main sources of inspiration : ethnomethodology. Taking this orientation seriously requires going beyond simply using ethnographically oriented field studies, and to identify precisely the specific notions which structure this disciplinary field. In this paper, we stress the influence of the notion of "accountability" in the works undertaken on cooperation and its technical support. In contrast, we present an alternative approach based on the notion of "shared context" which draws upon some of the orientations that can be found in "accountability", but which exhibits some major differences. }, Annote = {The authors describes the fundamentals elements of the "situated action" approach (and its main sources of inspiration : ethnomethodology). Introduction - most of the theories used in CSCW appeared "against" the cognivist paradigm - CSCW framework inspired mostly by situated action (garfinkel -> suchman) + activity theory (engestr{\"o}m) + distributed cognition (hutchins) - suchman criticized the cognitivist paradigm: she questioned the notion of internal representation, the functional role of plans are too limited to structure the control of action, there should be more emphasis on context - importance of ethnomethodology in suchman's work: emphasis put on mutual intelligibility and environments resources. Control of the activity - unlike classical cognitive psychology (which state that the actor is in charge of controlling the actions), the 'situated action' theory states that the actor shares this control with artefacts (technological or organisational) and people: - 3 kinds of artefacts : objects (1. their physical affordance (gibson) 2. environment spatial organisation: it gives information about the state of the process (kirsh)), prescritpion (procedures), other agents (then the control is operated through explicit demands (direct or indirect communication acts)) or non-intentional. - coordination is the production of mutual intelligibility + verification of the production of this mutual intelligibility. The best condition is co-presence (because everybody access the same resources). - coordination needs: agents have to interprete what's happening (actions, traces, spatial arrangements of objects) so they need a specific knowledge for this, agents needs to be available, agents needs to determine which information should be transmitted Accountability - The concept of ``accountability'' (Garfinkel 1967) is central to ethnomethodology and then CSCW - accountability = observable-and-reportable, i.e. available to members as situated practices of looking-and-telling. Being accountable, people's actions and statements are inevitably subject to evaluation by others. By observing the social situations in which they find themselves, people continuously analyze the actions of others for their sense. People then design their own actions in a situation based in part on their emerging analyses or ``accounts'' of what the other people on the scene are doing. - in CSCW accountability is represented by the concept of "mutual awareness", awareness = monitoring other's + displaying one's activity Use if shared context - having a shared context allows: efficient interaction processes, action coordination, joint problem solving, interaction regulation - discussion of the "common ground" notion, comes from psycholinguistics (Clark), for this framwork, sharing information needs having the same (or compatible) knowledge and beliefs. -> Mutual knowledge: some theorists (Clark; Schaffer) argue that mutual knowledge of some type is require (A and B mutually know p) Sperber and Wilson claims that it's not possible because it's a kind of infinite regress (hence not cognitively possible): A and B mutually know p: A knows p B knows p A knows that B knows p B knows that A knows p A knows that B knows that A knows p B knows that A knows that B knows p ad infinitum - Schmidt proposes a distinction between "Mutual" and "reciprocal" Mutual manifestness - notion by (Sperber and Wilson 1988) to adress the pb of the "common ground" infinite regression, not cognitively possible, then the hypothesis of "Mutual knowledge" cannot be validated. - Sperber and Wilson states that human communication needs a shared knowledge but they describe a notion weaker than Clark's common ground. - Sperber and Wilson 1988: "A fact is manifest to an individual at a given time if and only if he is capable at that time of representing it mentally and accepting its representation as true or probably true" - various degree of manifestness depending on cognitive and perceptual skills: a phone rings in a room where is A; at the same time a car pass by in the street: the ring is more manifest than the car's noise. - Drawing from this notion of "mutual manifestness", Sperber and Wilson define the concept of "cognitive environment": "a cognitive environment of an individual is a set of facts that are manifest to him" (him = the individual): all the fact the individual can perceive and infer. Certain facts may be more manifest than others. For instance, facts that are relevant to an agent's goals are more manifest to her/him than others. - The same facts may be manifest in the cognitive environment of two people. In this case, these individuals share a cognitive environment which represents all the facts that they are capable of perceiving and/or inferring -> "Mutual Cognitive Environment". In this environment every fact is mutually manifest. Thus, in a mutual cognitive environment, the identity of agents who share it is mutually manifest. For example, in an environment (for example a room) in which a telephone has just rung, it will be mutually manifest for the agents who share this environment that the phone has just rung. As in the individual case, events may be also more or less mutually manifest. In other words, there are degrees of mutual manifestness of events. The degree or level of mutual manifestness of events depends also on the perceptual and cognitive abilities of individuals and on the situation. In the model, Shared Context is viewed as a sub-set of events that are mutually manifest to a set of agents in a given environment. Shared Context can be considered as a sub-set of the MCE (some elements which are actually parts of the MCE will not be considered as relevant in the context of the work situation : for example the fact that an identified agent wears blue trousers can be manifest, but as far as we know this has little to do with the task at hand (which is, controlling the aircraft)-, and thus will not be taken into account). - The point is hence to identify, among all the manifest elements that happen in the situation, which are those that should be considered by the actors. }, Author = {P. Salembier and M. Zouinar}, Date-Added = {2004-12-08 13:42:18 +0100}, Date-Modified = {2004-12-08 13:48:01 +0100}, Journal = {@CTIVITES}, Keywords = {mutual awareness, shared context}, Number = {1}, Title = {Intelligibilit\'e mutuelle et contexte partag\'e. Inspirations conceptuelles et r\'eductions technologiques}, Url = {http://www.activites.org/v1n2/html/salembier.html}, Volume = {2}, Year = {2004}} @inproceedings{arminen2003, Address = {Helsinki}, Annote = {The location of co-conversationalist is commonly relevant during mobile phone conversation. However, the location is not discussed and does not appear to be relevant in geographical terms. The location is done relevant by the activies parties are involved. Joint activities make relevant spatio-temporal location, such as distance in minutes from the meeting point via the vehicle used. The precursor for any mutual communication is interactional availability, and the proximal location may have become relevant as a constraint, such as being on a dinner table or toilet. Extended discussions of location concern mainly its socio-emotional sense, such as biographical meaning, place where marriage proposal was done, etc. To put it other way round, the strict geographical location is relevant for mobile conversationalists only on few instances, such as instructing somebody on how to find place x (and even that may require further explanations). The design of location sensitive devices and applications should take into account that pure geographical location is rarely of users' interest.}, Author = {I.Arminen}, Booktitle = {Proceedings of The Good, the Bad and the Irrelevant: The User and the Future of Information and Communication Technologies}, Date-Added = {2004-12-13 16:46:01 +0100}, Date-Modified = {2004-12-13 17:16:53 +0100}, Editor = {L.Haddon and E.Mante-Meijer and B.Sapio, K.H.Kommenon and L.Fortunati and A.Kant}, Keywords = {location formulation, cell phone}, Month = {September}, Title = {``Location: a socially dynamic property --- a study of location telling in mobile phone calls}, Url = {http://goodbad.uiah.fi/files/public/P025/P025.doc}, Year = {2003}} @article{crabtree2003b, Abstract = {Human conduct is always situated in a particular space or place yet little is understood about the social organisational relationship between space, place and conduct. In pursuing a sociological line of thought, ordinary conceptions of space have been elaborated such that spaces and places are seen as constructions expressly designed to constrain and shape our lives. While there is much to such notions, the embodied practices and interactional competences in and through which space is socially organised in realtime pass by `unnoticed'. Drawing on an ethnographic perspective in general, and an ethnomethodological perspective in particular, this paper outlines an approach to the study of the social organisation of space and place from the largely unnoticed point of view of social action. }, Author = {A.Crabtree}, Date-Added = {2004-12-13 15:35:29 +0100}, Date-Modified = {2004-12-13 15:37:44 +0100}, Journal = {Homo Oeconomicus}, Keywords = {space and place, context, ethnography, social organisation}, Number = {4}, Pages = {591-605}, Title = {Remarks on the social organization and space and place}, Url = {http://www.mrl.nott.ac.uk/~axc/documents/Homo_Oeconomicus.pdf}, Volume = {XIX}, Year = {2003}} @inproceedings{brown2002, Abstract = {Researchers and designers are increasingly making use of geographic location in designing context-aware computer systems. However, there has been little conceptual work on how geography interacts with technology. In this paper, we use the concepts of "place and space" to explore how technologies are used geographically and how they impact on, and are used in, the physical environment. Fieldwork with tourists using maps and guidebooks shows how technology brings space and place together in activity. This discussion is used to look at how technologies might better span place and space.}, Address = {London, UK}, Annote = {Brown and Perry criticizes here the notion of 'Space and Place' defined by Harrison and Dourish (1996). According to D&H, a place is "a space which as a meaning". "Specifically, to call something a ``place'', brings attention to its located, embodied, personal, human nature. And to call something ``space'' is to bring attention to its abstract, objective, global, general, inhuman qualities. A tension is therefore then set up between ``place'' and ``space'', the difference between these terms bringing out the conflict between (respectively) the local and the contingent and the abstract and distributed. (...) place and space are strictly geographical -- `space' refers to the abstract processes that organise and arrange the material world. Place refers to the fact that we never escape the everyday physical world we live in: we still walk down the same streets every day, even if the organisation of cities into streets can be described more abstractly as a historical process which has developed over many years."}, Author = {B. Brown and M. Perry}, Booktitle = {Proceedings of the ACM conference on Designing interactive systems: processes, practices, methods, and techniques}, Date-Added = {2004-12-07 16:04:32 +0100}, Date-Modified = {2004-12-07 16:29:18 +0100}, Keywords = {space and place, context, activity, CSCW}, Pages = {246 - 254}, Publisher = {ACM Press: NY}, Title = {Of maps and guidebooks: designing geographical technologies}, Url = {http://www.dcs.gla.ac.uk/~barry/papers/DIS%20brown%20FINAL.pdf}, Year = {2002}} @article{pascoe2000, Abstract = {"Using while moving" is the basic ability fieldwork users require of a mobile computer system. These users come from a wide range of backgrounds but have in common an extremely mobile and dynamic workplace. We identify four specific characteristics of this class of users: dynamic user configuration, limited attention capacity, high-speed interaction, and context dependency. A prototype is then presented that was designed to assist fieldworkers in data collection tasks and to explore the HCI design issues involved. The prototype was used in an extensive field trial by a group of ecologists observing giraffe behavior in Kenya. Following this trial, improvements were made to the prototype interface which in turn was tested in a subsequent field trial with another group of ecologists. From this experience, we have formulated our resulting ideas about interface design for fieldworkers into two general principles: Minimal Attention User Interfaces (MAUIs) and context awareness. The MAUI seeks to minimize the attention, though not necessarily the number of interactions, required from the user in operating a device. Context awareness enables the mobile device to provide assistance based on a knowledge of its environment.}, Author = {J.Pascoe and N.Ryan and D.Morse}, Date-Added = {2004-12-13 16:57:34 +0100}, Date-Modified = {2004-12-13 16:59:36 +0100}, Journal = {ACM Transactions on Computer-Human Interaction (TOCHI)}, Keywords = {HCI, mobile, fieldwork}, Number = {3}, Pages = {417-437}, Title = {Using while moving: HCI issues in fieldwork environments}, Url = {http://portal.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=355329}, Volume = {7}, Year = {2000}} @article{dourish2004, Abstract = {The emergence of ubiquitous computing as a new design paradigm posessignificant challenges for HCI and interaction design. Traditionally, human-computerinteraction has taken place within a constrained and well-understood domain of experience -- single users sitting at desks and interacting with conventionally-designedcomputers employing screens, keyboards and mice for interaction. New opportunitieshave engendered considerable interest in ``context-aware computing'' -- computational systems that can sense and respond to aspects of the settings in which they are used.However, considerable confusion surrounds the notion of ``context'' -- what it means,what it includes, and what role it plays in interactive systems. This paper suggests that the representational stance implied by conventional interpretations of ``context'' misinterpretsthe role of context in everyday human activity, and proposes an alternative model thatsuggests different directions for design. }, Annote = {Dourish addresses the notion of context in a novel way with regard to computer science interests. The main lesson is that context and content(activity) cannot be separated. Context should not been seens as a stable external description of the setting in which activity arises. Instead, it arises from and is sustained by the activity himself. Well it's not brand new for people who are into dynamic problem solving studies (cognitive psychology) but for HCI/Computer Science it is important. The most interesting part: "By turning our attention from ``context'' (as a set of descriptive features of settings) to ``practice''(forms of engagement with those settings), we assigned a central role to the meanings that people find in the world and the meanings of their actions there in terms of the consequences andinterpretations of those actions for themselves and for others. The important point, however, isthat we now see those meanings as essentially open-ended; we recognize that part of what people are doing when they adopt and adapt technologies, incorporating them into their own work, iscreating and communicating new meanings though those technologies as their working practicesevolve. The broad principle that these examples illustrate is that users, not designers, determine the meaning of the technologies that they use, through the ways in which they incorporate theminto practice. Accordingly, the focus of the design is not simply ``how can people get their workdone,'' but ``how can people create their own meanings and uses for the system in use''; and in turn, this suggests an open approach in which users are active participants in the emergence ofways of working. "}, Author = {P. Dourish}, Date-Added = {2004-12-07 11:02:58 +0100}, Date-Modified = {2004-12-07 11:13:09 +0100}, Journal = {Personal and Ubiquitous Computing}, Keywords = {space and place, context, activity, CSCW}, Number = {1}, Pages = {19-30}, Title = {What We Talk About When We Talk About Context}, Url = {http://www.ics.uci.edu/~jpd/publications/2004/PUC2004-context.pdf}, Volume = {8}, Year = {2004}} @inproceedings{jiang2004, Abstract = {In this paper, we demonstrate how field studies, interviews, and low-fidelity prototypes can be used to inform the design of ubiquitous computing systems for firefighters. We describe the artifacts and processes used by firefighters to assess, plan, and communicate during emergency situations, showing how accountability affects these decisions, how their current Incident Command System supports these tasks, and some drawbacks of existing solutions. These factors informed the design of a large electronic display for supporting the incident commander, the person who coordinates the overall response strategy in an emergency. Although our focus was on firefighters, our results are applicable for other aspects of emergency response as well, due to common procedures and training. }, Address = {Vienna, Austria}, Author = {X.Jiang and J.Hong and L.Takayama and J.A.Landay}, Booktitle = {Proceedings of the 2004 conference on Human factors in computing systems}, Date-Added = {2004-12-13 17:00:28 +0100}, Date-Modified = {2004-12-13 17:04:53 +0100}, Keywords = {mobility, collaboration, evaluation}, Pages = {679-686}, Title = {Ubiquitous computing for firefighters: field studies and prototypes of large displays for incident command}, Url = {http://guir.berkeley.edu/pubs/chi2004/2004-firefighters.pdf}, Year = {2004}} @inproceedings{flintham2003, Abstract = {We describe two games in which online participants collaborated with mobile participants on the city streets. In the first, the players were online and professional performers were on the streets. The second reversed this relationship. Analysis of these experiences yields new insights into the nature of context. We show how context is more socially than technically constructed. We show how players exploited (and resolved conflicts between) multiple indications of context including GPS, GPS error, audio talk, ambient audio, timing, local knowledge and trust. We recommend not overly relying on GPS, extensively using audio, and extending interfaces to represent GPS error.}, Address = {Florida, USA}, Annote = {It's interesting because it deals with how they evaluated their location-based games relying on three sources of data: 1. offline feedback from players via email and face-to-face conversations (for those known to us) and also debriefing meetings with the project team. 2. ethnographic observation (utilising video and field notes) of the activities of the runners, players and behind-the-scenes production crew. 3. statistical and manual analysis of system logs of GPS positions, GPS errors and text messages to reveal broad patterns of activity. }, Author = {M.Flintham and R.Anastasi and S.Benford and T.Hummings and A.Crabtree and C.Greenhalgh and T.Rodden and N.Tandavanith and M.Adams and J.Row-Farr}, Booktitle = {Proceedings of the conference on Human factors in computing systems}, Date-Added = {2004-12-13 17:07:48 +0100}, Date-Modified = {2004-12-13 17:21:00 +0100}, Keywords = {mobility, collaboration, evaluation}, Pages = {569-576}, Title = {Where on-line meets on the streets: experiences with mobile mixed reality games}, Url = {http://www.equator.ac.uk/PublicationStore/2002-flintham.pdf}, Year = {2003}} @inproceedings{Martinez03, Abstract = {Interaction analysis is a core function for the support of coaching and evaluation in CSCL. It relies on information captured from the actions performed by the participants during the collaborative process. This information includes data of distinct nature and format, which demands a flexible and standardised data representation, adaptable to different analytical perspectives and collaborative situations. Besides this, it is known that the correct interpretation of human action needs to take context into account. We propose in this paper our approach towards the definition of an XML-based representation of source data, which includes a description of the context of collaboration, and offers a common representation for data of different origin and nature. It is extensible, and independent of the subsequent data analysis methods to which it might be applied. The paper also discusses the possibilities and limitations of XML as a representation language. }, Address = {Bergen, Norway}, Annote = {The main idea contained in this paper is that CSCL lacks of tools for representing the interactions as this is considered to be fundamental for understanding the collaborative learning (\cite{Dillenbourg99}). For the author, the proposed solution, in XML, may support the evaluation of the collaborative learning. For me, it also add an important dimension to the support of the learning process per se. Finally, this paper contains the definition of what is a Collaborative Action: ``An action that by itself or by its effects can be perceived by at least a member of the group distinct of the one that performed the action.''}, Author = {A. Mart{\'i}nez-Mon{\'e}s and P. De La Fuente Redondo and Y. Dimitriadis}, Booktitle = {Proceedings of the Computer Supported Collaborative Learning Conference CSCL2003}, Local-Url = {file://localhost/Volumes/Newton/Documents/CRAFT/papers/CSCL03_cameraready.pdf}, Month = {June 14--18}, Title = {Towards an XML-Based Representation of Collaborative Actions}, Url = {http://ulises.tel.uva.es/miembros.php?lang=en{\&}mlogin=12}, Year = {2003}} @article{jordan1995, Annote = {good introductive paper about interaction analysis}, Author = {B.Jordan and A.Henderson}, Date-Added = {2004-12-13 17:23:24 +0100}, Date-Modified = {2004-12-13 17:26:52 +0100}, Journal = {The Journal of the Learning Sciences}, Keywords = {interaction analysis, cscl, cscw}, Number = {1}, Pages = {39-103}, Title = {Interaction Analysis: Foundations and Practice}, Url = {http://lrs.ed.uiuc.edu/students/c-merkel/APPENK.HTM}, Volume = {4}, Year = {1995}} @inproceedings{monk1993, Abstract = {The study of computer-mediated communication (CMC) has brought together investigators from very different research traditions. Investigators coming from Sociology and Anthropology have been trained in the tradition of ethnography, whereas investigators coming from Experimental Psychology and Human Factors think more in terms of the hypothetico-deductive tradition of experiment and quantitative measurement. The position of this workshop is that these traditions can be seen as complementary rather than contradictory. Indeed it can be argued that there is already a merging of the two approaches when it comes to methods of data collection. The major differences are in the way data are interpreted. }, Address = {New York}, Author = {A. Monk and B. Nardi and N. Gilbert and M. Mantei and J. McCarthy}, Booktitle = {Proceedings of InterCHI '93}, Date-Added = {2004-11-27 14:34:56 +0100}, Date-Modified = {2004-11-27 14:39:35 +0100}, Editor = {S. Ashlund and K. Mullet and A. Henderson and E. Hollnagel and T. White}, Keywords = {ethnography, experiments, evaluation}, Organization = {ACM}, Pages = {3-6}, Title = {Mixing oil and water? Ethnography versus experimental psychology in the study of computer-mediated communication}, Url = {http://portal.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=169059.169060&dl=GUIDE&dl=ACM&type=series&idx=169059&part=Proceedings&WantType=Proceedings&title=Conference%20on%20Human%20Factors%20and%20Computing%20Systems}, Year = {1993}} @article{brown2003a, Abstract = {The evaluation and study of ubiquitous computing is an essential part of learning from design success and failure. Yet understanding technologies which are, by their very nature, embedded in the world presents new challenges for evaluation. In particular, there are limitations in how approaches based on experimental lab studies can reveal about complex contexts outside the laboratory. Observational methods offer an alternative approach which allows broader lessons to be drawn from prototypes' use insitu. Part of this is moving from the `evaluation' the use of systems to `exploring' their use. We discuss three different studies where we have used observational methods to explore the use of ubicomp. In the `tourism study' we studied a setting before the introduction of technology to learn what sorts of ubiquitous technologies would be appropriate for tourists. In the `lighthouse co-visiting study' we conducted a field experiment of a prototype museum co-visiting system. Lastly, in the `hummingbird study' we looked at the use of a location based technology by ski instructors as part of nonstaged activities. Each of these studies show how observational methods and experimental ubicomp technologies can be combined. From these example we discuss the different stages of conducting an observational study, and give pointers to how ubicomp designers themselves could use observational methods in their work. }, Annote = {In this paper, the authors explain the added value of evaluating ubiquitous computing products. They advocated for 'exploring' rather than 'evaluating'. They exemplify this claim with 3 systems. I am strongly interested in their argumentation about the challenges to study Ubicomp: - ubicomp is experimental then work on prototype: fragile, unreliable, sometimes physically larger than final product - the real world (where the experiment is conducted) is very different from the lab settings - ubicomp designed to be embedded into the environment often for long periods of time: difficult to study over time (longitudinal studies) -> difficult to create usage scenario, and it will be difficult to study them in lab context - ubicomp often involved in chains of interaction between different device and individuals so it's difficult to take this into account in the usage scenario. - ubicomp used in lots of different environments, different from classical one, and often multi.context, unpredictable use of mobile stuff. - ubicomp use: short and sporadic Those challenges are hard to solve in a conventional lab study. Besides, experiments outside the lab are difficult as well.}, Author = {B. Brown and A. Weilenmann}, Keywords = {ubiquitous computing, evaluation, exploration}, Title = {Designing through exploration: using observational methods in ubiquitous technology research}, Url = {http://www.dcs.gla.ac.uk/~?barry/papers/exploration.pdf}, Year = {2003}} @inbook{ito2004, Address = {Cambridge, MA}, Annote = {Japanese academics (Mizuko Ito and Daisuke Okabe) defines the concept of `technosocial situations' to refer to technologically-mediated social orders (= Erving Goffmans' theory of social situation : isomorphism between physical space and social situation). Their work (an ethnographic research on mobile phone use and location in Japan) reveals that heavy mobile texting use fosters new kinds of technosocial situations. A stablizing set of patterns emerges through the use of SMS : - mobile text chat : particularly to fill small `communication void', in setting like public transportation where there are prohibitions voice calls. - ambient virtual co-presence : messaging can be a way of maintaning ongoing background awareness of others -> a shared virtual space persistent as a technosocial system but not persistent from a technological perspective. - augmented flesh meet : a technology-enhanced physically co-located gathering : ``mobile phones have become devices for augmenting the experiences and properties of physically colocated encounters (berfore, during and after the encounter). Teens use mobile phones to bring in the presence of other friends who were not able to make it to the physical gathering, or to access information that is relevant to that particular time and place". Before the meeting : in order to arrange the meeting (time, place, lateness{\ldots}) -> coordination. During : when a sms come into a friend's phone, it is common to ask whi it was from, what is the content, a conversation about that ensue. After : the conversation continues (participants thank the person who organized the gathering, add information ("I forgot to tell you{\ldots}") -> a newly emergent norm. constuction of new technosocial settings and situations : stretching of prior boundaries of what it means to ``be together''}, Author = {M. Ito and D. Okabe}, Chapter = {Personal, Intimate: Mobile Phones in Japanese Life}, Date-Added = {2004-11-25 15:32:47 +0100}, Date-Modified = {2004-12-13 16:55:55 +0100}, Edition = {MIT Press}, Editor = {M.Ito and M.Matsuda and D.Okabe}, Keywords = {cell phone}, Publisher = {MIT Press}, Title = {Technosocial Situations: Emergent Structurings of Mobile Email Use}, Url = {http://www.itofisher.com/PEOPLE/mito/mobileemail.pdf}, Year = {2004}} @inproceedings{perry2003, Abstract = {This paper explores and identifies cognitive issues that develop out of the use of representational media by collaborating groups of people involved in problem solving. We take the analytic perspective of distributed cognition to examine the role that these artifacts have on information processing activity in augmenting human action and in transforming the problem space. The analysis is further used in identifying issues for cognitive engineering in the design of spatial, augmentative resources to support collaborative problem solving.}, Address = {Boston, MA}, Author = {M. Perry and K. O'Hara and G. Spinelli and B. Sharpe}, Booktitle = {Proceedings of the 25th annual meeting of the cognitive science society}, Date-Added = {2004-11-25 10:54:44 +0100}, Date-Modified = {2004-11-25 10:59:04 +0100}, Keywords = {space, distributed cognition, HCI}, Month = {July 31 - August 2}, Pages = {916-921}, Title = {The Role of Space in Socially Distributed Cognition: Some Issues for Cognitive Engineering}, Url = {http://www.ccm.ua.edu/pdfs/178.pdf}, Year = {2003}} @article{cheok2004, Abstract = {Human Pacman is a novel interactive entertainment system that ventures to embed the natural physical world seamlessly with a fantasy virtual playground by capitalizing on mobile computing, wireless LAN, ubiquitous computing, and motion-tracking technologies. Our human Pacman research is a physical role-playing augmented-reality computer fantasy together with real human--social and mobile gaming. It emphasizes collaboration and competition between players in a wide outdoor physical area which allows natural wide-area human--physical movements. Pacmen and Ghosts are now real human players in the real world, experiencing mixed computer graphics fantasy--reality provided by using the wearable computers. Virtual cookies and actual tangible physical objects are incorporated into the game play to provide novel experiences of seamless transitions between real and virtual worlds. We believe human Pacman is pioneering a new form of gaming that anchors on physicality, mobility, social interaction, and ubiquitous computing}, Annote = {- Interesting game - But the analysis is too simple - And it's just a game (for fun not to higher purposes)}, Author = {A.D. Cheok and K.H. Goh and W. Liu and F. Farbiz and S.W. Fong and S.L. Teo and Y. and X. Yang}, Date-Added = {2004-11-25 10:36:22 +0100}, Date-Modified = {2004-11-25 10:40:00 +0100}, Journal = {Personal and Ubiquitous Computing}, Keywords = {locative media, evaluation, gps}, Number = {2}, Pages = {71-81}, Title = {Human Pacman: a mobile, wide-area entertainment system based on physical, social, and ubiquitous computing}, Url = {http://portal.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=992039.992041}, Volume = {8}, Year = {2004}} @inproceedings{grinter2001, Address = {Amsterdam}, Annote = {This paper presented interesting and relevant facts regarding SMS : 63{\%} of messages are sent from teenagers' own houses -> the use of texte message is preferred even though telephones are available. The report also rport on the misunderstandings associated with text message language. Other facts reported : teenagers use text messaging to co-ordinate how and when to interact, revise and adjust arrangements and chat, The restrictive length of text messages allows users to forego conversational conventions and reduces time spent on the interaction, Text messaging is cheaper, allowing teenagers to manage their expenses using prepaid vouchers, Text messaging supports quiet, private communication, Text messaging changes the dynamics of teenage communication but not the content, Exchanges are shorter but richer, Communication by text message is in real time allowing teenagers to change plans at a moment's notice. Good report about texting}, Author = {R.E.Grinter and M.A.Y.Eldridge}, Booktitle = {Proceedings of the European Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work - ECSCW (2001).}, Date-Added = {2004-11-25 15:43:54 +0100}, Date-Modified = {2004-12-13 16:51:00 +0100}, Editor = {W.Prinz and M.Jarke}, Keywords = {sms, cell phone}, Pages = {219-238}, Publisher = {Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Press}, Title = {y do tngrs luv 2 txt msg?}, Url = {http://www.grinter.org/ecscw01.pdf}, Year = {2001}} @techreport{ling1999, Abstract = {In this paper we outline the concepts of micro- and hyper-coordination via the use of the mobile telephone. The material is based on 10 group interviews carried out in Norway in the fall of 1999. The analysis shows that micro-coordination, largely an instrumental activity, was common for two-career parents. When examining the teens, however, we found that in addition to the instrumental use, they have adopted the expressive use of the device. This, in addition to the use of the device in the social presentation of self has lead us to call their use hyper-coordination. This adoption of technology follows from their specific life period where they desire access to peers and wish to distance themselves, to a certain degree, from their parents. The mobile telephone is a logical tool in this work. Other advantages are that it allows them new ways with which to develop intimate relationships and to remain abreast of social life. }, Address = {Norway}, Author = {R. Ling and B. Yttri}, Date-Added = {2004-11-25 15:54:44 +0100}, Date-Modified = {2004-11-25 15:57:37 +0100}, Institution = {Telenor Research & Development}, Keywords = {cell phone use, coordination}, Number = {Report 30/99}, Title = {Nobody sits at home and waits for the telephone to ring: Micro and hyper-coordination through the use of the mobile telephone}, Url = {http://www.telenor.no/fou/program/nomadiske/articles/08.pdf}, Year = {1999}} @inproceedings{fagerberg2003, Abstract = {From working with location-based information systems we know that positioning is problematic. A different approach was tested, where users themselves were allowed to name and define the places they wanted to use. The question was if they would do so, and if they would understand the notion of ``place''. In a user study, 78 users created 84 place labels. The user study also gave us some unexpected input to the users' perception of place: not only physical, but also virtual places were created.}, Address = {Fort Lauderdale, FL}, Author = {P. Fagerberg and F. Espinoza and P. Persson}, Booktitle = {Proceedings of CHI 2003}, Date-Added = {2004-11-25 09:48:51 +0100}, Date-Modified = {2004-11-25 09:53:28 +0100}, Editor = {ACM}, Keywords = {locative media, evaluation, space and place}, Month = {April 5-10}, Title = {What is a place? Allowing users to name and define places.}, Url = {http://www.sics.se/~espinoza/documents/shorttalk232-fagerberg.pdf}, Year = {2003}} @inproceedings{weilenmann2004, Abstract = {In light of recent attempts to design location-based mobile services, we present findings from a study of the ways in which positioning is done in everyday talk over the mobile phone. We show that a location is more than a coordinate on a map, and give examples of how people formulate location in a number of different ways according to the particulars of the activity. Based on these findings, we argue that rather than delivering location information in the form of geographical coordinates, location-based services should describe location in ways relevant to the users, thereby supporting the existing positioning practice. }, Address = {Tampere, Finland}, Author = {A. Weilenmann and P. Leuchovius}, Booktitle = {Proceedings of the third Nordic conference on Human-computer interaction}, Date-Added = {2004-11-25 10:40:46 +0100}, Date-Modified = {2004-12-13 16:44:45 +0100}, Keywords = {locative media, positioning, naming, cell phone}, Pages = {33-42}, Publisher = {ACM Press: NY}, Title = {"I'm waiting where we met last time": exploring everyday positioning practices to inform design}, Url = {http://portal.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=1028014.1028019}, Year = {2004}} @inproceedings{dillenbourg1996, Author = {P. Dillenbourg and M. Baker and A. Blaye and C. O'Malley}, Booktitle = {Learning in Humans and Machines. Towards an Interdisciplinary Learning Science}, Editor = {H. Spada and P. Reinmann}, Keywords = {collaboration, interaction analysis, cscl, cscw}, Pages = {189-211}, Publisher = {Oxford: Elsevier Science.}, Title = {The Evolution of Research on Collaborative Learning.}, Url = {http://sir.univ-lyon2.fr/GRIC/GRIC5/Home/mbaker/webpublications/DilBakOmaBla.PDF}, Year = {1996}} @article{weilenmann2003, Abstract = {The aim of this paper is to begin to investigate the ways in which participants in mobile phone conversations orient to each other's location, activities and availability. Through looking at data consisting of recorded mobile phone conversations, a conversation analytic approach is used to make initial observations regarding the character of mobile phone conversations. It is found that the frequent question ``What are you doing?'' sometimes worked as getting a location as part of the answer, which shows how location, activity and availability are strongly related. The participants thus got information about location, when this was considered relevant, through asking about activity. Location seemed especially relevant if it could give information about a future meeting. In some conversations where there seemed to be things going on where the called party was located, the caller attended to this by initiating the topic using a strategy giving the called a chance to end the conversation. }, Author = {A. Weilenmann}, Date-Added = {2004-11-25 10:45:26 +0100}, Date-Modified = {2004-11-25 10:51:26 +0100}, Journal = {Environment and Planning}, Keywords = {locative media, positioning, naming, cell phone}, Number = {9}, Pages = {1589 - 1605}, Title = {``I can't talk now, I'm in a fitting room'': Availability and location in mobile phone conversations}, Url = {http://www.viktoria.se/~alexandra/ publications/I%20cant%20talk%20now.pdf}, Volume = {35}, Year = {2003}} @article{brehmer1993, Annote = { Il est donc n{\'e}cessaire d'inf{\'e}rer des strat{\'e}gies ou des tactiques sur la base de patterns de comportements observ{\'e}s, et ce sont ces strat{\'e}gies qui peuvent {\^e}tre analys{\'e}es par la suite (Brehmer {\&} Doerner, 1993). Pr{\'e}cisons que l'accomplissement de la t{\^a}che ou le succ{\`e}s obtenu relativement aux buts de la simulation, sont consid{\'e}r{\'e}s comme {\'e}tant la cons{\'e}quence des comportements du sujet (Porter, 1995) et donc de ces strat{\'e}gies. Trois approches ont {\'e}t{\'e} employ{\'e}es jusqu'{\`a} pr{\'e}sent pour analyser les donn{\'e}es issues de l'interaction entre l'individu et les micromondes (Brehmer {\&} Doerner, 1993, p. 179). La premi{\`e}re porte sur les diff{\'e}rences individuelles et consiste g{\'e}n{\'e}ralement {\`a} d{\'e}crire les diff{\'e}rences inter-individuelles observ{\'e}es, par exemple, en termes de comportements et de strat{\'e}gies de d{\'e}cision, ou en termes de performances. (Brehmer {\&} Doerner, 1993). La deuxi{\`e}me approche consiste {\`a} faire des {\'e}tudes de cas, c'est-{\`a}-dire {\`a} {\'e}tudier de mani{\`e}re approfondie la fa{\c c}on dont un joueur interagit avec le micromonde, tout en recherchant des comportements atypiques, plus int{\'e}ressants dans ce contexte que les comportements typiques (Brehmer {\&} Doerner, 1993). La troisi{\`e}me approche quant {\`a} elle consiste {\`a} {\'e}tudier les caract{\'e}ristiques du syst{\`e}me, par exemple en comparant le comportement des joueurs face {\`a} diff{\'e}rentes conditions exp{\'e}rimentales, ou en analysant leurs erreurs (Brehmer {\&} Doerner, 1993). }, Author = {B. Brehmer and D. D{\"o}rner}, Journal = {Computers in Human Behavior}, Keywords = {game, analysis, experiments}, Number = {2-3}, Pages = {171-184}, Title = {Experiments with computer-simulated microworlds: Escaping both the narrow straits of the laboratory and the deep blue sea of the field study}, Volume = {9}, Year = {1993}} @inproceedings{jermann2001, Address = {Maastricht: Maastricht MacLuhan Institute}, Author = {P. Jermann and A. Soller and M. Muehlenbrock}, Booktitle = {Proceedings of EuroCSCL}, Keywords = {interaction analysis, cscl, cscw}, Pages = {324-331}, Title = {From Mirroring to Guiding: a Review of the State of the Art Technology for Supporting Collaborative Learning}, Year = {2001}} @inproceedings{zouinar2004, Abstract = {This paper describes a method and a data collection infrastructure for capturing data about the use of a mobile multimodal system in the field, under realistic conditions. The infrastructure includes instrumentation worn by the user to capture his perspective while moving, a means of capturing a wider view of the context and a multimodal data logger.}, Address = {Nice, Sophia-Antipolis}, Annote = {Interesting paper, though in french, from M. Zouinar, M. Relieu, G. Calvet and P. Salembier about a new methodology to analyze collaborative mobile activities and multimodality. Here it is about some PDA activity. The starting point is that current ethnological methods are not that adapted. It is too difficult to preserve the natural aspect of the activity while you are watched by two persons with a digital camera. That is why the authors proposes to use, apart from the logfiles (where all activities done on the PDA are captured), special glasses augmented with a camera. So that researchers could have a subjective view of the user: what he is doing on the PDA screen, with the stylus. They still film the guy doing its activity. Then they have two viewpoints: contextual view (filmed with the camera) + subjective view (filmed with the camera-glasses). The methdology is hence simple: Analysis/Transcriptions/Coding/Self-confrontation. Constraints for designing an observation framework/method to study mobile activities: In order to analyze mobile situations, there are two solutions: - lab situations: for instance observing a cell phone user on a running machine. The problem here is that you don't take into account elements of natural context (people who pass by for instance). - natural situations with the observer who films the pda user, the problem here is that you have a specifi interactions between the user and the observer and this is a bias. In situations where you use multimodality (switching from one modality to another one like using text instead of audio), the context is of tremendous importance. Constraints are: - to preserve in an optimal way the natural character of the context in order to access to the link between people's activities and the context, turn it into something that could be analyzed. The point is to see how people change of modalities. - mobile constraints: the method should be light, and don't require too much energy (battery), not disruptive (for the user and the people who pass by). Replay: they used logfiles enriched by users' self-confrontation (they were shown their interaction's traces like video of what they saw). This is meant to make them remenber interaction episodes and eas e 'verbal production' about their activities during the task.}, Author = {M. Zouinar and M. Relieu and P. Salembier and G. Calvet}, Booktitle = {Actes des premi{\`e}res journ{\'e}es francophones Mobilit{\'e} et Ubiquit{\'e} 2004}, Keywords = {multimodality, interaction analysis, mobile computing, data capture}, Month = {June}, Organization = {ACM}, Publisher = {ACM Press: NY}, Title = {Observation et capture de donn{\'e}es sur l'interaction multimodale en mobilit{\'e}}, Url = {http://www.irit.fr/GRIC/personnel/salembier/PDF/ubiquite.pdf}, Year = {2004}} @inproceedings{joiner1999, Address = {Oxford}, Annote = {Richard Joiner, Kim Issroff and John Demiris advocated for using a visual representation of where teammates among a group went during a collaborative foraging task. They claimed that this could provide a visual way to represent a collaborative search strategy; e.g for instance a clear division of labor or not. However, they also mentionned some problems: - these maps do not represent many of the interesting features of human-human collaboration (nature of the interactiona between the participants: a pair could simply took turn rather than working collaboratively, their trace diagram could show little backtracking and overlap, but this would not have been as a result of their collaboration) - it is important to aupplement this analysis method with others to provide a fuller description of their interaction - trace diagrams do not accurately represent time and duration. It could be possible to have a number of trace diagrams for different periods of time, but using this method would make it difficult to get an overall picture of the interaction}, Author = {R. Joiner and K. Issroff and J. Demiris}, Booktitle = {Collaborative Learning: Cognitive and Computational Approach}, Editor = {P. Dillenbourg}, Keywords = {interaction analysis, cscw, spatial analysis}, Organization = {Pergamon Press (Elsevier Science)}, Pages = {81-102}, Title = {Comparing Human-Human and Robot-Robot Interactions}, Year = {1999}} @book{mecklenbrauker1998, Address = {London, UK}, Annote = {Interesting paper about spatial cognition that deals with the link between action and spatial information, a neglected issue in this discipline. In this paper, the authors describes the connections between spatial information and action. Their point is that previously acquired spatial information (i.e. information about locations along a learned route) can be associated with imagined or symbolically performed actions. The emphasizes the salience of the actions and their connections to the spatial environment. They also provide the reader with an interesting list of tasks used to study spatial representations: - studying maps of an environment and drawing a map from memory versus giving a verbal description (Taylor and Tversky, 1992) - distance estimation (Rothkegel, Wender, Schumacher, 1998) - orientation and location estimation judgements (Wender, Wagner and Rothkegel, 1997) - navigation task}, Author = {S. Mecklenbr{\"a}uker and W. Wippich and M. Wagener and J. Saathoff}, Editor = {C. Freksa and C. Habel and K. F. Wende}, Journal = {Spatial Cognition}, Keywords = {spatial cognition, action, memory}, Pages = {39-62}, Publisher = {Springer-Verlag}, Title = {Spatial Information and Actions: , An Interdisciplinary Approach to Representing and Processing Spatial Knowledge}, Url = {http://portal.acm.org/results.cfm?query=author%3AP46610{\&}querydisp=author%3AChristian%20%20Freksa{\&}coll=GUIDE{\&}dl=GUIDE{\&}CFID=28305810{\&}CFTOKEN=22301236}, Year = {1998}} @article{decortis2000, Annote = {This paper proposes a nice overview of three important framework in the field of CSCW/HCI: distributed cognition, cognitive ergonomics and activity theory. All these theories operate very differently. They direct our focus as analysts to different aspects of their respective unit of analyses (each theory has a different viewpoint) based on both what they deem as important to analyze (scope of the unit) as well as how they perform the analysis, and how they communicate it. Each of the frameworks breaks down the work situation into distinct units of meaning or of signalling. theories - authors - methods + distributed cognition - hutchins - cognitive anthropology (focuses mainly on how information is represented in the cognitive system and what processes are operating in these representations. The system is computerized and mapped by recording how information propagates through the system in terms of representational states across media'' / {\&}The media refers to internal (individual memories) and external representation (including computer and paper display). The representational state refers to how the various information and knowledge resources are transformed during the work activities''). + activity theory - engestr{\"o}m - activity/engestr{\"o}m triangle + french ergonomics - thereau - field observations (an initial macro analysis ofthe work situation aims to give an overall description of the work environment. Next, a micro-analysis aims to detect finer-grained mechanisms that will become concept-driven and guide the rest of the analysis ) "these three frameworks because each can be used to analyse cooperative activities, even if that is not their only application. We could argue that they have di!erent epistemological orientations. Broadly speaking, distributed cognition has its roots in anthropology, while cognitive ergonomics and activity theory are derived from psychology, with cybernetic and anthropological in#uences present in cognitive ergonomics." "each of these frameworks analyses cognition in real settings, and rejects the conventional symbolic approach where factors are abstracted and studied out of context" "Cognitive ergonomics more strongly emphasizes the distinctions between macro and micro analyses of the work situation and between the prescribed task and the activity actually carried out. (an initial macro analysis ofthe work situation aims to give an overall description of the work environment. Next, a micro-analysis aims to detect finer-grained mechanisms that will become concept-driven and guide the rest of the analysis ) Cognitive ergonomics makes a distinction between task and activity (Leplat and Hoc, 1983). Tasks are the explicit aspects of work. Activities are the tacit aspects of work A major distinguishing characteristic of distributed cognition is its focus on {\&}{\&}representational artefacts'' and the manner in which information is processed by the system (information path and transformation). Distributed cognition focuses on how information is represented and transformed, its trajectory and how representations (internal and external) are coordinated in the system. It considers the work setting as a thinking system performing cognitive tasks. }, Author = {F. Decortis and S. Noirfalise and B. Saudelli}, Journal = {International Journal of Human Computer Interaction}, Keywords = {distributed cognition, activity theory, cognitive ergonomics}, Number = {1-2}, Pages = {5-33}, Title = {Activity theory, cognitive ergonomics and distributed cognition: three views of a transport company}, Volume = {53}, Year = {2000}} @article{halverson2000, Annote = {The paper discusses a very hot issue that I have to deal with for my phd: what are we doing with all the theories/conceptual framework CSCW/HCI adopted. HCI indeed 'imported' lots of framework: activity theory [engestrom; kuuti; nardi] , actor-network theory [latour], conversation analysis [goffman],coordination theory [Schmidt, nielsen, carstenson], distributed cognition theory [Halverson, hutchins, perry, rogers], ethnomethodology [Button; Hughes et al; randall et al], grounded theory [Strauss], situated action [suchman], and social/symbolic interactionism [Strauss; Star]. The problem is actually that these theories deal with the use and the study of CSCW systems but they poorly address the design of such systems. "By adopting theories from other fields we may be bringing theoretical constructs into focus that are not appropriate for CSCW. For example, activity theory and distributed cognition theory are both theories about cognition. What they can say about group interaction is based on what they say about cognition. That may be OK, depending on how we use the theory. But how do we evaluate their usefulness for us? She then describes three uses of these theories: - descriptive power: theories are useful to described the world - rhetorical power: theories are useful to talk about the world - inferential power: theories help us to do inferences She takes the example of Activity Theory and Distributed Cognition to show it can apply to CSCW.}, Author = {C.Halverson}, Journal = {Journal of Computer Supported Cooperative Work}, Keywords = {cscw, distributed cognition, activity theory}, Number = {1-2}, Pages = {243-267}, Title = {Activity theory and distributed cognition: or What does CSCW to do with theories?}, Url = {http://www.research.ibm.com/SocialComputing/Papers/CAH1.pdf}, Volume = {11}, Year = {2000}} @inproceedings{collazos2002, Address = {St. Thomas, Virgin Islands, USA,}, Annote = {The authors claims that awareness could improve the shared understanding among a collaborative group (close to the transactive memory idea).}, Author = {C. Collazos, L. Guerrero, J. Pino and S. Ochoa}, Booktitle = {Proceedings of International Conference: Information and Knowledge Sharing (IKS 2002)}, Keywords = {awarenes, cscl, mutual modeling}, Month = {November}, Organization = {IASTED}, Pages = {13-18}, Title = {Introducing Knowledge-Shared Awareness}, Year = {2002}} @inproceedings{monk1996, Abstract = {One can distinguish between measures that characterise the process of communication in CSCW from measures of outcome. Whereas outcome measures are solely concerned with how successfully the work was done, process measures are concerned with the nature of the communication that took place i.e., the ways in which the work was done. Outcome measures are limited when it comes to evaluating technology. They are often insensitive and even when they do show effects they provide no real understanding of why those effects have occurred. To overcome these limitations, we outline some measures of process. These measures are quantitative and practical. They include global measures of communication efficacy such as: common ground and subjective effort; surface features of conversational content such as the use of personal pronouns and measures of conversational structure such as topic mention, overlapping speech and gaze. It is argued that a profile of process measures of this kind can provide a deeper understanding of how some communication configuration effects conversation and thus computer supported work. This understanding is necessary if we are to provide effective task sensitive guidelines for design.}, Address = {Berlin}, Author = {A.F. Monk and J.C. McCarthy and L.A. Watts and O. Daly-Jones}, Booktitle = {CSCW Requirements and Evaluation}, Editor = {P. Thomas}, Keywords = {analysis, collaboration, cscw}, Pages = {125-139}, Publisher = {Springer Verlag}, Title = {Measures of Process}, Year = {1996}} @article{hilbert2000, Annote = {Seminal paper about CSCW evaluation}, Author = {D. Hilbert and D. Redmiles}, Journal = {ACM Computing Surveys}, Number = {4}, Pages = {384-421}, Title = {Extracting Usability Information from User Interface Events}, Url = {http://www.ics.uci.edu/~?dhilbert/papers/acmcs/revised.pdf}, Volume = {32}, Year = {2000}} @article{billinghurst2003, Annote = {In this paper, the authors proposes the use of performance (task outcome like time to complete the task), process (conversational elements that occur, number of interaction for instance) and subjective measures (participants own impressions of the collaboration). Distinction established by (Monk et al., 1996) - performance measures : typical performance measures include how fast a task can be completed, and the quality of the outcome of the collaboration (but this is a poor mesure of the effect of the technology on communication). - process measures : objective communication measures that capture the process of collaboration extracted from transcriptions of audio and video recordings and notes made during the collaborative task : frequency of conversational turns, incidence/duration of overlapping speech, number of interruptions, turn completions, dialogue structure, back-channels... Gesture and non-verbal behaviors can also be analyzed for characteristic features (kinetic, spatial, pointing and others). See references in their paper - subjective measures : based entirely on the users perception of their experience.}, Author = {M. Billinghurst and D. Belcher and A. Gupta and K. Kiyokawa}, Journal = {International Journal of Human Computer Interaction}, Keywords = {augmented reality, communication, collaboration, analysis}, Number = {3}, Pages = {395-423}, Title = {Communication Behaviors in Colocated Collaborative AR Interfaces}, Volume = {16}, Year = {2003}} @inproceedings{ioannidou2003, Address = {Volos, Greece}, Annote = {In this paper, the authors describes how they analyzed a distributed cognitive system. They classified minimal cognitive actions carried out by each subgroup (for instance formulating a place via wlakie-talkie) and put them in a sequence chart, which is interesting to find recurrent actions or patterns. }, Author = {I. Ioannidou and A. Dimitracopoulou}, Booktitle = {Proceedings of 6th International Conference of Technology in Mathematics Teaching}, Editor = {T. Triandafillidis and K. Hatzikiriakou}, Keywords = {distrbited cogntion, cognitive system, analysis, collaboration}, Month = {October}, Pages = {133-141}, Title = {Young Children Collaborating to use Maps during Technology based Distributed Learning Activities}, Year = {2003}} @article{lyman1967, Author = {S. Lyman and M.B Scott}, Journal = {Social Problems}, Keywords = {space, sociology, communication}, Number = {15}, Pages = {236-249}, Title = {Territoriality. A Neglected Sociological Dimension}, Year = {1967}} @book{rheingold2002, Address = {Cambridge, MA}, Annote = {For the review see diary 1st September.}, Author = {H. Rheingold}, Keywords = {sociology, mobile technologies}, Publisher = {Perseus Publishing}, Title = {Smart Mobs: The Next Social Revolution}, Year = {2002}} @article{minami1995, Author = {H. Minami and K. Tanaka}, Journal = {Environment and Behavior}, Keywords = {space, communication, sociology, distance}, Number = {18}, Pages = {43-55}, Title = {Social and Environmental Psychology: Transaction Between Physical Space and Group-Dynamic Processes}, Volume = {27}, Year = {1995}} @article{krikorian2000, Abstract = {This article examines the spatial relationships between avatars (i.e., graphical identities or icons) over time in a 2-dimensional online chat environment. The Spatial Distance Analysis Program (SDAP) was developed to measure the distance between avatars in a specially designed Palace environment. Correlations between distance and interpersonal communication constructs of (1) conversational appropriateness, (2) social attraction, and (3) uncertainty reduction indicate that distance effects are significant in an online environment. Specifically, it was found that general conversational appropriateness mediated between uncertainty reduction and specific conversational appropriateness for individuals who moved closer together and farther apart over time, respectively. Furthermore, the relationship between social attraction and distance indicated a significant positive parabolic function; that social attraction (i.e., liking) decreased at middle distances and increased at low and high distances. This finding suggests that there are three interpersonal distance zones in online communication.}, Author = {D.H. Krikorian and J.S. Lee and T. Makana Chock and C. Harms}, Journal = {Journal of Computer Mediated Communication}, Keywords = {communication, virtual space, spatial, proxemics}, Number = {4}, Title = {Isn't That Spatial?: Distance and Communication in a 2-D Virtual Environment}, Url = {http://www.ascusc.org/jcmc/vol5/issue4/krikorian.html}, Volume = {5}, Year = {2000}} @inproceedings{gutwin2002, Address = {Washington}, Author = {C. Gutwin and S. Greenberg}, Booktitle = {Team Cognition: Understanding the Factors that Drives Process and Performance}, Date-Modified = {2005-12-15 16:25:02 +0100}, Editor = {E. Salas and S.M. Fiore and J.A. Cannon-Bowers}, Keywords = {awareness tool, cognition, cscw}, Pages = {177-201}, Publisher = {APA Press}, Title = {The Importance of Awareness for Team Cognition in Distributed Collaboration}, Year = {2002}} @inproceedings{munro1999, Address = {London}, Author = {A.J. Munro and K. H{\"o}{\"o}k, K. and D. Benyon}, Booktitle = {Social Navigation of Information Space}, Editor = {A. Munro, K. H{\"o}{\"o}k and D. Benyon}, Keywords = {social navigation, information navigation}, Pages = {1-14}, Publisher = {Springer}, Title = {Footprints in the Snow}, Year = {1999}} @book{schelling1960, Address = {Cambridge}, Author = {T. Schelling}, Booktitle = {The Strategy of Conflict}, Keywords = {schelling point, focal point, coordination}, Publisher = {Harvard University Press}, Title = {The Strategy of Conflict}, Year = {1960}} @article{kirsh1994, Author = {D. Kirsh and P. Maglio}, Journal = {Cognitive Science}, Keywords = {space, cognition, pragmatics}, Number = {18}, Pages = {513-549}, Title = {On distinguish between epistemic from pragmatic action}, Year = {1994}} @article{schober1993, Author = {M.F. Schober}, Journal = {Cognition}, Keywords = {space, cognition, pragmatics}, Number = {47}, Pages = {1.24}, Title = {Spatial perspective-taking in conversation}, Year = {1993}} @book{argyle1976, Address = {Cambridge}, Author = {M. Argyle and M. Cook}, Keywords = {gaze, awareness, communication}, Publisher = {Cambridge University Press}, Title = {Gaze and Mutual Gaze}, Year = {1976}} @article{steinzor1950, Author = {B. Steinzor}, Journal = {Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology}, Keywords = {space, communication, sociology, copresence}, Pages = {552.555}, Title = {The spatial factor in face to face discussion groups}, Volume = {45}, Year = {1950}} @article{kirsh1995, Author = {D. Kirsh}, Journal = {Artificial Intelligence}, Keywords = {space, cognition}, Number = {1-2}, Pages = {31.68}, Title = {The Intelligent Use of Space}, Volume = {73}, Year = {1995}} @inproceedings{takayama2003, Address = {Fort Lauderdale, FL}, Author = {L. Takayama and L. Leung and X. Jiang and J. Hong}, Booktitle = {Extended Abstracts of the Human Factors in Computing Systems: CHI2003}, Keywords = {awareness tool, proximity, mobile}, Month = {April 5-10}, Title = {You're Getting Warmer! How Proximity Information Affects Search Behavior in Physical Spaces}, Year = {2003}} @techreport{jeffrey1998, Address = {Stockholm: Swedish Institute of Computer Science}, Author = {P. Jeffrey and G. Mark}, Booktitle = {Workshop on Personalised and Social Navigation in Information Space}, Editor = {K. H{\"o}{\"o}k and A. Munro and D. Benyon}, Institution = {Stockholm: Swedish Institute of Computer Science}, Keywords = {virtual space, navigation}, Number = {SICS Technical Report T98:02}, Publisher = {Springer}, Title = {Constructing Social Spaces in Virtual Environments: A Study of Navigation and Interaction}, Year = {1998}} @article{knowles1973, Author = {E.S. Knowles}, Journal = {Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,}, Keywords = {space, communication, sociology, group size}, Number = {26}, Pages = {327-331}, Title = {Boundaries around group interaction: The effect of group size and member status on boundary permeability}, Year = {1973}} @inproceedings{tversky1998, Address = {Berlin}, Author = {B. Tversky and P.U. Lee}, Booktitle = {Spatial Cognition. An Interdisciplinary Approach to Representing and Processing Spatial Knowledge}, Editor = {C. Freksa and C. Habel and K. Wender}, Keywords = {linguistics, space}, Pages = {157-175}, Publisher = {Springer-Verlag}, Title = {How space structures language}, Year = {1998}} @inproceedings{whittaker1991, Address = {New Orleans, USA}, Author = {S. Whittaker and S. Brennan and H.H. Clark}, Booktitle = {Proceedings of CHI'91 Human Factors in Computing Systems}, Editor = {S. Robertson and J. Olson and G. Olson}, Keywords = {cscw, coordination}, Pages = {360-367}, Publisher = {ACM Press: NY}, Title = {Co-ordinating activity: an analysis of computer supported cooperative work}, Url = {http://www.shef.ac.uk/uni/academic/I-M/is/people/stafpage/whittake/chi91.pdf}, Year = {1991}} @inproceedings{kiesler2002, Address = {Cambridge: MA}, Author = {S. Kiesler and J.N. Cummings}, Booktitle = {Distributed Work}, Editor = {P. Hinds and S. Kiesler}, Keywords = {proxemics, proximity, copresence, coordination, communication, pragmatics}, Pages = {57-80}, Publisher = {MIT Press}, Title = {What Do We Know about Proximity and Distance in Work Groups? A Legacy of Research}, Year = {2002}} @article{cite-key, Author = {B. Latan{\'e} and J.H. Liu and A. Nowak and M. Bonevento and L. Zheng}, Journal = {Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin}, Keywords = {space, proxemics, distance}, Number = {8}, Pages = {795-805}, Title = {Distance Matters: Physical Space and Social Impact}, Volume = {21}, Year = {1995}} @inproceedings{belloti1996, Address = {Cambridge, MA}, Annote = {Seminal paper about mobile work}, Author = {V.Belloti and S. Bly}, Booktitle = {Proceedings of the Conference Computer Supported Cooperative Work CSCW'96}, Date-Modified = {2004-12-13 14:39:51 +0100}, Editor = {K.Ehrlich and C.Schmandt}, Keywords = {cscw, mobility, collaboration}, Month = {November, 16-20}, Pages = {209-218}, Publisher = {ACM Press: New York}, Title = {Walking away from the desktop computer : Distributed collaboration and mobility in a product design team}, Year = {1996}} @inproceedings{benford2002, Abstract = {Staging public performances can be a fruitful approach to CVE research. We describe four experiences: Out of This World, a gameshow; Avatar Farm, a participatory drama; Desert Rain, a mixed reality performance; and Can You See Me Now?, a game that mixed on-line players with players on the streets. For each, we describe how a combination of ethnography, audience feedback and analysis of system logs led to new design insights, especially in the areas of orchestration and making activity available to viewers. We propose enhancing this approach with new tools for manipulating, analysing and sharing 3D recordings of CVEs.}, Address = {Bonn, Germany}, Annote = {The paper "Staging and Evaluating Public Performances as an Approach to CVE" (Steve Benford, Mike Fraser, Gail Reynard, Boriana Koleva and Adam Drozd The Mixed Reality Laboratory, Nottingham), claims that staging public performances can be a fruitful approach to CVE research. The authors describe four experiments in 4 contexts (four different location based games used a art/public performance). "For each, we describe how a combination of ethnography, audience feedback and analysis of system logs led to new design insights, especially in the areas of orchestration and making activity available to viewers." Among many methods of conducting research (proof implementation as proof of concept, "demo or die", controlled experiment in laboratorym theory backed up with mathematical proof...), they propose to put technology out of the lab and create an "event" (vow event-based research ;) This is also a nice paper in the sense that it provides idea for analyzing mobile collaboration: }, Author = {S. Benford and M. Fraser and G. Reynard and B. Koleva and A. Drozd}, Booktitle = {Proceedings of Collaborative Virtual Environments}, Editor = {C. Greenhalgh and W. Broll}, Keywords = {collaboration, cscw, mobile activity}, Month = {September}, Organization = {ACM}, Pages = {80-87}, Publisher = {ACM Press}, Title = {Staging and Evaluating Public Performances as an Approach to CVE Research}, Url = {http://machen.mrl.nott.ac.uk/PublicationStore/2002-benford-0.pdf}, Year = {2002}} @inproceedings{bergqvist1999, Author = {M. Bergqvist and P. Dahlberg and H. Fagrell and J. Redstr{\"o}m}, Booktitle = {Proceedings of The Twenty Second IRIS Conference (Information Systems Research Seminar In Scandinavia)}, Keywords = {locative media, proximity, awareness tool}, Publisher = {University of Jyv{\"a}skyl{\"a} Press}, Title = {Location Awareness and Local Proximity: Exploring Proximity Awareness}, Year = {1999}} @inproceedings{gaye2003, Address = {Udine, Italy}, Author = {L. Gaye and L.E. Holmquist}, Booktitle = {Physical Interaction -- Workshop on Real World User Interface at Mobile HCI 2003 Symposium}, Keywords = {locative media, audio, spatial annotation}, Title = {Tejp: Designing for Embodied Interaction with Personal Information Layers in Public Space}, Url = {http://www.medien.informatik.uni-muenchen.de/en/events/pi03}, Year = {2003}} @inbook{low1992, Author = {Low. S {\&} Altman I}, Booktitle = {Human Behavior and Environment}, Chapter = {12, Place attachment}, Editor = {I. Altman and S. Low}, Pages = {1-12}, Publisher = {New York Plenum Press}, Title = {Place attachment : a conceptual inquiry}, Year = {1992}} @article{krauss1966, Author = {R.M. Krauss and S. Weinheimer}, Journal = {Journal of Personality and Social Psychology}, Keywords = {referential communication, copresence}, Number = {3}, Pages = {343-346}, Title = {Concurrent feedback, confirmation, and the encoding of referents in verbal communication}, Volume = {4}, Year = {1966}} @article{harter1994, Author = {A. Harter and A. Hopper}, Journal = {IEEE Network}, Keywords = {cscw, awareness tool}, Number = {18}, Pages = {62-70}, Title = {A distributed location system for the active office}, Volume = {8}, Year = {1994}} @mastersthesis{mankins2003, Author = {M. Mankins}, Keywords = {spatial annotation, locative media}, School = {Massachusetts Institute of Technology}, Title = {Location Linked Information: A framework for emergent, location-based content deployment}, Year = {2003}} @article{cheyne1972, Author = {J.A. Cheyne and M.G. Efran}, Journal = {Sociometry}, Keywords = {space, communication, sociology}, Number = {35}, Pages = {477-487}, Title = {The effect of spatial and interpersonal variables on the invasion of group controlled territories}, Year = {1972}} @inproceedings{jonsson2003, Address = {Levallois-Perret, France}, Author = {G.K Jonsson and S.H. Bjarkadottir and B. Gislason and A. Borrie and M.S. Magnusson}, Booktitle = {L'{\'e}thologie appliqu{\'e}e aujourd'hui, Volume 3: Ethologie humaine}, Editor = {C. Baudoin}, Pages = {37-45}, Publisher = {Editions ED}, Title = {Detection of real-time patterns in sports: interactions in football}, Year = {2003}} @inproceedings{krauss2002, Address = {Cambridge, MA}, Author = {R.E. Kraut and S.R. Fussell and S.E. Brennan and J. Siegel}, Booktitle = {Distributed Work}, Editor = {P. Hinds and S. Kiesler}, Keywords = {copresence, proximity, collaboration, cscw}, Pages = {137-162}, Publisher = {MIT Press}, Title = {Understanding effects of proximity on collaboration: Implications for technologies to support remote collaborative work}, Year = {2002}} @inproceedings{nova2001, Abstract = {This paper presents a study that aims to review the awareness tools provided by video games to support team-play and team collaboration/communication. It also focuses on the use of these tools in groupware. A content analysis of gamers interview, the games observation and the game guides reading have revealed that, awareness tools used in games, support mainly location, presence, identity, action and event history. Communication tools like chat are also provided. From the tools that are reviewed here, there are several that might be useful in groupware : those which allow participants to gather in order to perform a task, those which provide direct vocal communication, those which allow users to configure their own awareness tools, etc. Video games also provide indication about the quality of the information that the awareness tools should offer. They must be accurate (a system should provide awareness tools adapted to the task) and as responsive as possible in order to minimize the user's cognitive load.}, Address = {Manchester, UK}, Author = {N. Nova}, Booktitle = {Proceedings of "Playing with the Future" Conference}, Keywords = {awareness, video games, cscw}, Month = {June}, Title = {Awareness Tools : Lessons from Quake-Like Awareness Tools : Lessons from Quake-Like Awareness Tools : Lessons from Quake-Like Awareness Tools : Lessons from Quake-Like Awareness Tools : Lessons from Quake-Like Awareness Tools : Lessons from Quake-Like}, Url = {http://tecfa.unige.ch/perso/staf/nova/awareness_games.pdf}, Year = {2001}} @inproceedings{wegner1987, Address = {New York}, Author = {D.M. Wegner}, Booktitle = {Theories of group behavior}, Editor = {B. Mullen and G.R. Goethals}, Keywords = {mutual modeling, mutual modelling, communication}, Publisher = {Springer-Verlag}, Title = {Transactive memory: A Contemporary Analysis of the Group Mind}, Year = {1987}} @phdthesis{mastrogiacomo2002, Author = {S. Mastrogiacomo}, Keywords = {communication, mutual modeling, grounding, mutual modelling}, Month = {June}, School = {Universit{\'e} de Lausanne}, Title = {Utilisation des zones de travail partag{\'e}es asynchrones pour am{\'e}liorer la compr{\'e}hension mutuelle dans les groupes de projet distribu{\'e}s}, Year = {2002}} @article{clark1989, Author = {H.H. Clark and E.F. Schaeffer}, Journal = {Cognitive Science}, Keywords = {communication, pragmatics, linguistics}, Number = {13}, Pages = {259-294}, Title = {Contributing to discourse}, Year = {1989}} @article{clark1986, Author = {H.H. Clark and D. Wilkes-Gibbs}, Journal = {Cognition}, Keywords = {communication, pragmatics, linguistics, referential communication}, Number = {22}, Pages = {1-39}, Title = {Referring as a collaborative process}, Year = {1986}} @article{nickerson1987, Author = {R.S. Nickerson and A. Baddeley and B. Freeman}, Journal = {Acta Psychologica}, Keywords = {mutual modeling, mutual modelling, cognition}, Pages = {245-259}, Title = {Are People Estimates of What other People Know Influenced by What They Themselves Know}, Volume = {64}, Year = {1987}} @techreport{nova2003a, Abstract = {This document reports on a brief literature review about social and cognitive functions of spatial features used when collaborating in both physical and virtual settings. Those concepts come from various fields like social, cognitive as well as environmental psychology or CSCW (Computer Supported Collaborative Work). I briefly summarize the social and cognitive affordances of spatial features like distance, proxemics, co-presence, visibility or activity in the context of physical and virtual space. The way human beings employ those features finally allows to give insights about potential avenues of research. }, Author = {N. Nova}, Date-Modified = {2005-01-06 10:42:37 +0100}, Institution = {EPFL Technical Reports}, Keywords = {cognition, collaboration, space, review}, Number = {200481}, Title = {Socio-cognitive functions of space in collaborative settings : a literature review about Space, Cognition and Collaboration}, Url = {http://tecfa.unige.ch/perso/staf/nova/CRAFT_report1.pdf}, Year = {2003}} @inproceedings{isaacs1996, Address = {Cambridge, MA}, Author = {H. Isaacs and J.C. Tang and T. Morris}, Booktitle = {Proceedings of the Conference Computer Supported Cooperative Work CSCW'96}, Keywords = {awareness tool, cscw}, Month = {November, 16-20}, Pages = {315-324}, Publisher = {ACM Press}, Title = {Piazza: A Desktop Environment Supporting Impromptu and Planned Interactions}, Year = {1996}} @inproceedings{bromme2000, Author = {R. Bromme}, Booktitle = {Practicing interdisciplinarity}, Editor = {P. Weingart and N. Stehr}, Keywords = {mutual modeling, intersubjectivity, grounding, communication, pragmatics}, Pages = {115-133}, Publisher = {Toronto: Toronto University Press}, Title = {Beyond one's own perspective: The psychology of cognitive interdisciplinarity}, Year = {2000}} @inproceedings{isaacs2002, Address = {Minneapolis}, Author = {H. Isaacs and A. Walendowski and D. Ranganathan}, Booktitle = {Proceedings of the Conference Computer-Human Interaction (CHI 2002)}, Keywords = {awareness tool, cscw}, Month = {April 20-25}, Pages = {179-186}, Title = {Hubbub: A sound-enhanced mobile instant messenger that supports awareness and opportunistic interactions}, Year = {2002}} @inproceedings{dillenbourg1997, Address = {Lausanne, Switzerland}, Author = {P. Dillenbourg and D. Traum}, Booktitle = {Swiss workshop on collaborative and distributed systems}, Keywords = {collaboration, cscl, distributed cognition}, Month = {May 1st}, Title = {The role of a whiteboard in a distributed cognitive system}, Url = {http://agora.unige.ch/conferences/Lausanne97/dillenbourg/}, Year = {1997}} @article{jang2002, Author = {C.Y. Jang and C. Steinfield and B. Pfaff}, Journal = {International Journal of Human-Computer Studies}, Keywords = {awareness tool, cognition, cscw, effects}, Pages = {109-126}, Title = {Virtual team awareness and groupware support: an evaluation of the TeamSCOPE system}, Volume = {56}, Year = {2002}} @inproceedings{gutwin1996, Address = {Cambridge, MA}, Author = {C. Gutwin and M. Roseman and S. Greenberg}, Booktitle = {Proceedings of the Conference Computer Supported Cooperative Work CSCW'96}, Keywords = {awareness tool, cognition, cscw, effects, usability}, Month = {November, 16-20}, Pages = {258-267}, Title = {A usability study of awareness widgets in a shared workspace groupware system}, Year = {1996}} @inproceedings{dourish1999, Address = {London}, Author = {P. Dourish}, Booktitle = {Social Navigation of Information Space}, Editor = {A. Munro and K. H{\"o}{\"o}k and D. Benyon}, Keywords = {social navigation}, Pages = {15-32}, Publisher = {Springer}, Title = {Where the Footprints Lead : Tracking Down Other Roles for Social Navigation}, Year = {1999}} @inproceedings{espinosa2000, Address = {The Hague, Netherlands}, Annote = { The paper underlines the importance of matching the features of an awareness tool with a workgroup's tasks and goals. Although the results obtained provide some encouraging evidence about the benefits of awareness tool use, they also make evident how the availability of such tools can be more of a distraction when available but not properly used. ({\ldots}) while the awareness tool seems to have contributed to a more efficient division of labor, the resulting reduced overlap in documents read by team members seems to result in a loss of common ground, thus foregoing the benefits of shared mental model formation. ({\ldots}) Also, consistent with the literature on groups, it is evident from our results that awareness tools need to be matched to appropriate tasks [18, 19]. The primary focus of our awareness tool was helping teams to solve a problem quickly. This is precisely what the tool did in our experiment. ({\ldots}) the features implemented in our awareness tool are adequate for a divergent problem in which there is no apparent right solution, and in which reaching a unified team solution is important. Strategic planning, sports team strategies, surgical teams in the operating room, and economic planning committees are examples of situations in which awareness tools of this type can help.. However, in order to provide support for problems in which a correct solution does exist, different types of awareness information would have to be presented to the user. This highlights the all familiar tradeoff between general awareness tools that provide a little help for many types of tasks, and specific awareness tools that significantly help only one type of task. It also highlights the need to find the optimal amount and type of awareness information to make available without creating unnecessary distractions and information overload. Quoted references: 18. McGrath, J. Groups: Interaction and Performance, Prentice Hall: Englewood Cliffs, N.J., 1984. 19. McGrath, J. and Hollingshead, A. Groups Interacting With Technology, SCalifornia, 1994. Why do I blog this? this five years old paper is very relevant to my current research about location-awareness tool in mobile collaboration. Even though it deals with virtual environments, it raises very relevant problems related to awareness efficiency that I am also dealing with in Catchbob!.}, Author = {A. Espinosa and J. Cadiz and L. Rico-Gutierrez and R. Kraut and W. Scherlis and G. Lautenbacher}, Booktitle = {Proceedings of the CHI Conference on Human factors in computing systems}, Date-Modified = {2005-11-10 22:45:05 +0100}, Keywords = {awareness tool, cognition, cscw, effects}, Month = {April, 1-6}, Pages = {392-399}, Title = {Coming to the Wrong Decision Quickly: Why Awareness Tools Must be Matched with Appropriate Tasks}, Year = {2000}} @inbook{clark1991, Address = {Washington}, Annote = {Seminal paper about grounding theory}, Author = {H.H. Clark and S.E. Brennan}, Chapter = {Grounding in Communication}, Editor = {L. Resnick and J. Levine and S. Teasley}, Keywords = {communication, pragmatics, linguistics, grounding}, Pages = {127-149}, Publisher = {American Psychological Association}, Title = {Perspectives on Socially Shared Cognition}, Year = {1991}} @article{fussel1992, Author = {S.R. Fussell and R.M. Krauss}, Journal = {Journal of Personality and Social Psychology}, Keywords = {communication, coordination, mutual modeling}, Number = {3}, Pages = {378-391}, Title = {Coordination of Knowledge in Communication: Effects of Speakers' Assumptions about What Others Know}, Volume = {62}, Year = {1992}} @article{hutchins1995, Abstract = {Cognitive science normally takes the individual agent as its unit of analysis. In many human endeavors, however, theoutcomes of interest are not determined entirely by the information processing properties of the individuals. Nor can they be inferred from the properties of the individual agents, alone, no matter how detailed the knowledge of the properties of those individuals may be. This article presents a theoretical framework that takes a distribuited, socio-technical system rather than an individual mind as its primary unit of analysis. This framework is explicitly cognitive in that it is concerned with how information is represented and how representations are transformed and propagated in the performance of tasks. An analysis of a memory task in the cockpit of a commercial airliner shows how the cognitive properties of such distribuited system can differ radically from the cognitive properties of the individuals who inhabit them.}, Author = {E. Hutchins}, Journal = {Cognitive Science}, Keywords = {distributed cognition, cscw, navigation}, Number = {19}, Pages = {265-288}, Title = {How a Cockpit Remembers Its Speeds}, Url = {http://hci.ucsd.edu/lab/hci_papers/EH1995-3.pdf}, Year = {1995}} @inproceedings{dourish1992, Address = {Toronto, Canada}, Annote = {Seminal paper about awareness}, Author = {P. Dourish and V. Bellotti}, Booktitle = {Proceedings of ACM CSCW'92 Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work}, Editor = {J. Turner and R. Kraut}, Keywords = {awareness tool, coordination, cscw}, Pages = {107-114}, Title = {Awareness and coordination in shared workspaces}, Year = {1992}} @incollection{dillenbourg1999, Annote = {The authors did not agree on a single definition of `collaborative learning'. However they propose this definition: it is a situation in which two or more people learn or attempt to learn something together. In this definition all the elements can be interpreted in different ways: (a) ``two or more'' may be interpreted as a pair, a small group (3-5 subjects), a class (20-30 subjects), a community etc.; (b) ``learn something'' may be interpreted as ``follow a course'', study some kind of material, perform learning activities such problem solving etc.; (c) ``together'' may be interpreted as a face-to-face, computer mediated, synchronous or not, frequent in time or not. Under these different aspect of CSCL we encounter firstly a variety of scales: from the number of people in the group to the amount of time spent during the interactions, the methodological approaches may be completely different. One of the question raised by Schwartz is that: ``The question is not how individuals become members in a larger cognitive community as they do in apprenticeship studies. Rather, the question is how a cognitive community could emerge in the first place.'' The author highlight how in the comparison between dialogue with oneself and dialogue with a peer, the main difficulty is not to be able to identify similarities but instead to establish what exactly differs between the two process. In this sense the group can be viewed as a unit and a unit as a group, coming back to the change of scales. }, Author = {P. Dillenbourg}, Booktitle = {Collaborative-learning: Cognitive and Computational Approaches}, Editor = {P. Dillenbourg}, Keywords = {cscl, cognition, collaborative processes}, Pages = {1-19}, Publisher = {Oxford: Elsevier}, Title = {What do you mean by collaborative learning?}, Url = {http://tecfa.unige.ch/tecfa/publicat/ dil-papers-2/Dil.7.1.14.pdf}, Year = {1999}} @inproceedings{dourish1994, Address = {Glasgow, UK}, Annote = {Seminal paper about social navigation}, Author = {P. Dourish and M. Chalmers}, Booktitle = {Proceedings of Human Computer Interaction HCI'94}, Keywords = {social navigation, information navigation}, Title = {Running Out of Space: Models of Information Navigation}, Year = {1994}} @book{clark1996, Address = {Cambridge, England}, Annote = {Seminal book about grounding theory, simple to read}, Author = {H.H. Clark}, Keywords = {communication, pragmatics, linguistics, grounding}, Publisher = {Cambridge University Press}, Title = {Using Language}, Year = {1996}} @article{cramton2001, Annote = {Seminal paper about mutual modeling}, Author = {C. Cramton}, Journal = {Organization Science}, Keywords = {mutual modeling, mutual modelling, communication}, Number = {3}, Pages = {346-371}, Title = {The mutual knowledge problem and its consequences for dispersed collaboration}, Volume = {12}, Year = {1991}} @inproceedings{fitzpatrick1996, Address = {Boston, MA}, Author = {G. Fitzpatrick and S.M. Kaplan and T. Mansfield}, Booktitle = {Proceedings of the Conference Computer Supported Cooperative Work CSCW'96}, Editor = {ACM}, Keywords = {space, cscw, work studies}, Month = {November, 16-20}, Pages = {334-343.}, Title = {Physical spaces, virtual places and social worlds: A study of work in the virtual}, Year = {1996}} @inproceedings{casas2002, Abstract = {In the following we discuss how a high precision, in-door positioning system (UNIZAR positioning system) can be part of a general positioning system to fit into different application areas depending on different needs and requirements for precision. specific focus is put on applications for learning and training contexts. We argue that many innovative user interfaces for learning are based on digital manipulatives, which could be substantially enhanced by positioning augmentation.}, Annote = {In this paper a positioning system called UNIZAR is discussed with particular attention to learning applications. The system uses radio frequency and ultrasound technology to measure dintance from welll known position-beacons to the mobile object. Potential learning application discussed are the following: (a) gesticulations and kinetics as communication (movement patterns); (b) relationship between people (and within the group); (c) relationship between the objects, and among combination of those with their virtual representation; (d) relationship of the user with the environment. Three context are suggested: 1. The worktable; 2. Micromobility; 3. Hyperpresence.}, Author = {R. Casas and D. Cuartielles and J. Falco and L. Malmborg}, Booktitle = {Proceedings of the International Workshop on Wireless and Mobile Technology in Education (WMTE'02)}, Editor = {IEEE}, Keywords = {locative media, mobile learning}, Pages = {161-162}, Publisher = {IEEE Computer Society}, Title = {Positioning technologies in learning}, Year = {2002}} @article{gutwin1999, Address = {Alberta, Canada}, Author = {C. Gutwin and S. Greenberg}, Journal = {ACM Transactions on Computer-Human Interaction}, Keywords = {awareness tools, usability, impacts}, Number = {3}, Pages = {243-281}, Title = {The effects of workspace awareness on the usability of real-time distributed groupware}, Volume = {6}, Year = {1998}} @inproceedings{espinoza2001, Abstract = {Location-based information systems allow the user to access information in relation to the user's position in geographical space. This paper outlines navigational and social aspects of such systems. It is argued that location-based systems must allow users to participate as content providers in order to achieve a social and dynamic information space. Moreover, as these systems allow commercial and private users to annotate space with information on a mass-scale, information filtering techniques will become essential in order to prevent information overload and user disturbance. We present a number of content-based and social filtering techniques to support this. We discuss implications for implementation and we describe a system (GeoNotes), which takes some of these aspects into account. }, Address = {Atlanta, Georgia}, Annote = {This paper describes the design of the GeoNotes system which enables the user to attach a virtual note to a physical place. The paper describe in details the interaction design they followed and it motivates the choices they made in details.}, Author = {F. Espinoza and F. Peterson and P. Sandin and H. Nystr\"{o}m and E. Cacciatore and M. Bylund}, Booktitle = {Ubicom 2001: Ubiquitous Computing}, Editor = {B. Brumitt and S. Shafer}, Keywords = {locative media, location-awareness, HCI}, Month = {September 30 - October 2}, Pages = {2-17}, Publisher = {Springer}, Title = {GeoNotes: Social and Navigational Aspects of Location-Based Information Systems}, Url = {www.sics.se/~?espinoza/documents/ GeoNotes_ubicomp_final.htm}, Year = {2001}} @unpublished{russell2004, Abstract = {This section attempts to give a brief overview of the potential capabilities of next generation location aware mobile devices; capabilities, which, if combined could potentially lead to significant shifts in the economic and social landscape.}, Author = {B. Russell}, Keywords = {locative Media}, Month = {April}, Title = {Locative Concepts}, Url = {http://rixc.lv/ram/en/public03.html}, Year = {2004}} @inproceedings{ott2002, Address = {Lugano, Switzerland}, Author = {D. Ott and P. Dillenbourg}, Booktitle = {Proceedings of the 4th International Conference on New Educational Environments}, Editor = {F. Fl{\"u}ckiger and C. Jutz and P. Schulz and L. Cantoni}, Keywords = {awareness tool, proxemics, grounding}, Month = {May}, Organization = {ICNEE}, Title = {Grounding through proximity in a 3D Collaborative Environment}, Year = {2002}} @inproceedings{tuters2004, Abstract = {At last month's Transmediale festival in Berlin [1], the Utrecht-based arts collective Social Fiction received the festival's prestigious Software award for their .walk (dot-walk) project, that combines computer code and "psychogeographic" streetwalking. During the walk, participants carry out an algorithmic series of instructions derived from computer code, that "calculates" the city as a giant "periapatetic computer" [2]. It may seem amazing that such a simple idea can even be considered software, but the concept behind it is the clever part, based, as it is, on a metaphor for how order emerges from chaos, borrowed from the ant colony, which generates maps through the brute force, random exploration of a territory. }, Address = {Manchester}, Annote = {Immanuel Kant (1790): it is not through received norms that we develop 'judgment', the critical foundation of cosmopolitan ethics, but in the confrontation of new ideas. This article contains a bunch of interesting links and quotes which are reported in an unordered manner. The central claim of the article is not clear. However some interesting ideas emerge. One of them is a claim raised by Ben Russell: a collective urban form can potentially emerge from the collective action of essentially selfish actors, coordinated though an intelligent system, perhaps even the basis for a new social contract of selectively accessible self-centered utopias. Two interesting links are the Open-source architecture by Dennis Kaspori The superstudio idea, by Peter Lang Lost dimension, by Paul Virilio}, Author = {M. Tuters}, Booktitle = {Futuresonic 04 proceedings}, Keywords = {locative media, space annotation}, Month = {April 27th -- May 2nd}, Title = {The Locative Commons: Situating Location-Based Media in Urban Public Space}, Url = {http://www.futuresonic.com/futuresonic/pdf/Locative_Commons.pdf}, Year = {2004}} @inproceedings{roschelle1995, Address = {Berlin}, Author = {J. Roschelle and S.D. Teasley}, Booktitle = {Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning}, Editor = {C.E. O'Malley}, Keywords = {collaboration, cscl}, Pages = {69-197}, Publisher = {Springer-Verlag}, Title = {The construction of shared knowledge in collaborative problem solving}, Year = {1995}} @article{weiser1991, Annote = {Seminal paper about ubiquitous computing}, Author = {M. Weiser}, Journal = {Scientific American}, Keywords = {ubiquitous computing}, Number = {3}, Pages = {94-104}, Title = {The computer for the 21st century}, Volume = {265}, Year = {1991}} @article{lane2003, Abstract = {Urban Tapestries is an action research project combining social research interaction design and cultural production. The project is developing a prototype system for accessing and publishing location specific content wirelessly, and creating sound maps of environments and journeys that can be shared remotely.}, Annote = {Urban Tapestries is a collaborative mapping project where people can participate in building sound map of the city and leave multimedia content attached to the map of the city while walking. Their core idea and the metaphor to attach this to the 2D representation of the city is pretty similar to my view of the MapTribe project. Their concept is to use a PDA combining a GPRS access with a WiFi communication system. The idea underneath is that combining the different systems of comjunication is possible to have a full coverage of the city space. The system is designed to propose spatial threads which corresponds to geographical paths connecting places with a common history of feature that the thread whants to highlight. Joint with this fruition activity, the user is also asked to author the map adding comments and other multimedia material while walking. An extra step is to give the user the abilit y to share this informaiton with other wlakers using Bluetooth beams. Three point constitute the distinctiveness of the project: 1. UT is cooperative and not hirarchical: it relies on the community and not on the network provider; 2.Co-creation not consumption: the content is not preparated but is co-created by the user; 3. accretive and organic not static: UT grows with time at the pace set by the users, a microcosm on how our cities and communities develop, prosper and die. }, Author = {G. Lane}, Journal = {Personal Ubiquitous Computing}, Keywords = {locative media, space annotation}, Month = {April}, Number = {7}, Pages = {169--175}, Title = {Urban Tapestries: Wireless networking, public authoring and social knowledge}, Url = {http://www.proboscis.org.uk/}, Year = {2003}} @article{holmquist1999, Abstract = {This paper introduces the concept of Inter--Personal Awareness Devices, or IPAD:s. An IPAD is an IT device designed to support awareness and collaboration between people when they are in the same physical location. The IPAD is a handheld or wearable device that supplies constant awareness information without relying on any underlying infrastructure. We have constructed one such device, the Hummingbird, which gives members of a group continuous aural and visual indications of when other group members are in the vicinity. We have performed several user test, which indicate that IPAD:s such as the Hummingbird can support collaboration and awareness between group members, and that they can complement other forms of communication such as phone and e-mail. We argue that the IPAD concept can serve as a useful starting point for discussions about handheld CSCW.}, Annote = {This paper describes one of the initial attempt to build an inter--personal awareness device. The system known as Hummingbird is in essence an active RF-id tag that emit a sound when a colleague or teammate happen to be close by. }, Author = {L.E. Holmquist and J. Falk and J. Wingstr{\"o}m}, Journal = {Journal of Personal Technologies}, Keywords = {CSCW, location awareness, mobile computing, werable computing, ubiquitous computing, augmented reality}, Number = {1--2}, Title = {Supporting Group Collaboration with Inter--Personal Awareness Devices}, Url = {http://www.teco.uni-karlsruhe.de/hcscw/sub/101.Holmquist/101.holmquist.html}, Volume = {3}, Year = {1999}} @inproceedings{nova2003b, Abstract = {This paper describes the findings of an experimental research concentrating on collaboration in a multi-player video game. The overall goal is to study the cognitive impacts of the awareness tools. The focus is in finding an effect on performance as well as on the representation an individual build of what his partner knows, plans and intends to do (i.e. Mutual Modelling). Using an awareness tools has a significant effect by improving task performance. However, the players who were provided with this tool did not show any improvement of their mutual modelling. Further analysis on contrasted groups revealed that there was an effect of the awareness tool on mutual modelling for players who spent a large amount of time using the tool.}, Address = {Autrans, France}, Author = {N. Nova and T. Wehrle and J. Goslin and Y. Bourquin and P. Dillenbourg}, Booktitle = {Proceedings of the 9th International Workshop on Groupware}, Editor = {J. Favela and D. Decouchant}, Keywords = {awareness, mutual modeling, mutual modelling, cscw}, Month = {September}, Pages = {99-108}, Rss-Description = {N. Nova and T. Wehrle and J. Goslin and Y. Bourquin and P. Dillenbourg (2003). The Impacts of Awareness Tools on Mutual Modelling in a Collaborative Video-Game. In J. Favela and D. Decouchant (eds) Proceedings of the 9th International Workshop on Groupware. pp. 99-108.}, Title = {The Impacts of Awareness Tools on Mutual Modelling in a Collaborative Video-Game}, Url = {http://tecfa.unige.ch/perso/staf/nova/paper_criwg.pdf}, Year = {2003}}