1 / 21

Michael S. Bernstein, Mark S. Ackerman, Ed H. Chi, Robert C. Miller

Michael S. Bernstein, Mark S. Ackerman, Ed H. Chi, Robert C. Miller. Ratio of “Understanding Users” papers to “Systems, Tools, Architectures and Infrastructure” papers submitted to the Interaction Beyond the Individual track at CHI 2011. 4:1. Trouble: Exponential Growth.

zyta
Download Presentation

Michael S. Bernstein, Mark S. Ackerman, Ed H. Chi, Robert C. Miller

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Michael S. Bernstein, Mark S. Ackerman, Ed H. Chi, Robert C. Miller

  2. Ratio of “Understanding Users” papers to “Systems, Tools, Architectures and Infrastructure” papers submitted to the Interaction Beyond the Individual track at CHI 2011. 4:1

  3. Trouble: Exponential Growth Your usage data is not really compelling because only a small fraction of Facebook is using the application. Worse, your numbers aren’t growing in anything like an exponential fashion. – CHI metareviewer, paraphrased

  4. Suggestion: Exponential Growth Separate evaluation of spread from steady-state. Which claim is the paper making?

  5. Trouble: Snowball Sampling The authors’ choice of study method – snowball sampling their system by advertising within their own social network – potentially leads to serious problems with validity. – CHI metareviewer, paraphrased

  6. Suggestion: Snowball Sampling Snowballing is inevitablein social systems. It is fundamental to how they operate.

  7. NoveltyBetween a Rock and a Hard Science

  8. sociotechnical

  9. studiersbuilders sociotechnical

  10. studiersbuilders sociotechnical Fatal Flaw Fallacy [Olsen] Ecological validity at the cost of internal validity [Ackerman 2000], [Barkhuus and Rode 2007], [Chi 2009], [Greenberg and Buxton 2008], [Kaye and Sengers 2007], [Landay 2009], [Lieberman 2003], [Olsen 2007], [Zhai 2003]

  11. studiersbuilders sociotechnical Show us elegant complexity.(simple ideas that enable complex scenarios) We let people type messages up to 140 characters. That’s it? What is possible now that wasn’t before? Nothing — but focus on emergent social activity. Can you add multitouch? Not using IE8.

  12. studiers builders socio technical Build a technically interesting system (that is hard to spread or evaluate), or Simplify to a system with socially interesting outcomes (that builders find less novel).

  13. The contribution needs to take one strong stance or another. Either it describes a novel system or a novel social interaction. If it’s a system, then I question the novelty. If it’s a social interaction, it needs more development. – CHI metareviewer, paraphrased Build a technically interesting system (that is hard to spread or evaluate), or Simplify to a system with socially interesting outcomes (that builders find less novel).

  14. Create a shared understanding of research contributions

  15. social technical New forms of social interaction Shared organizational memory [Ackerman 1994] Designs that impact social interactions Increasing online contribution [Beenen et al. 2004] Enable fluent social interaction in a new domain Socially translucent systems [Erickson and Kellogg 2000]

  16. social technical Designs collecting or powered by social data Wikidashboard [Suh et al. 2008]; sense.us [Heeret al. 2007] Algorithms to coordinate crowds or derive signal from social data Collaborative Filtering [Resnick et al. 1994]; Iterate-and-Vote [Little et al. 2010] Platforms and infrastructures TurKit [Little et al. 2010]

  17. × social technical Paired contributions can increase each others’ value ManyEyes [Viégas et al. 2007]

  18. In conclusion introduction: What are our millennium challenges? What is our relationship with industry and walled gardens? How can (and should) we evolve our standards of proof?

  19. Michael S. Bernstein, Mark S. Ackerman, Ed H. Chi, Robert C. Miller

More Related