Domino

Abstract

We present Domino, a descriptive framework for hybrid collaboration and hybrid coupling styles in partially distributed teams. Domino enables researchers to describe, analyze, and understand real-world hybrid collaboration practices, i.e., collaborative practices that involve simultaneous co-located and remote collaboration with phases of both synchronous and asynchronous work that spans multiple groupware applications and devices. It also helps to categorize collaborative activities based on yet undocumented hybrid coupling styles between the members of multiple partially distributed or co-located subgroups. Our Domino framework was derived from initial observations of real-world practice and refined by the detailed analysis of participants' behavior and working styles during a simulation of a complex hybrid collaboration task with six partially distributed teams of four users in our lab. The resulting framework allows researchers to view collaboration through a new analytical lens, use new analytical tools, and also derive implications for the design of collaborative tools.

A Survey on Cross‐Virtuality Analytics

“…This reflects the growing need for synchronous collaborative teamwork for solving complex tasks in multi‐role teams (such as sense‐making or analysis of data), no matter if co‐located, remote or partially distributed across different locations, as in the work by Neumayr et al . [NJA*18]. However, during further classification attempts, we noticed that in the context of XV or XR systems, the meaning of same space or different space becomes complex and ambiguous.…”

Learn-CIAM: A Model-Driven Approach for the Development of Collaborative Learning Tools

“…Hence, for instance, among the most relevant contributions we can highlight the ConcurTaskTrees (CTT) notation [19], which facilitates the specification of the most interactive aspects of cooperative tasks; the Groupware Task Analysis (GTA) approach [20], whose conceptual framework proposes a set of representations for the specification of the different groupwork aspects and the environment in which it is carried out; or the Collaborative Usability Analysis (CUA) approach [21], a task analysis technique designed to represent groupwork tasks and carry out the usability evaluations of groupware system. Regarding more recent works, we can also find in the literature other works such as the Model of Coordinated Action (MoCA) method [22], focused on the description of complex collaborative scenarios and environments such as those which have diverse, high-turnover memberships or emerging practices; Domino [23], a framework for hybrid collaboration that involves simultaneous co-located and remote collaboration with phases of both synchronous and asynchronous work that spans multiple groupware applications and devices; Collab4all [24], which addresses accessibility issues when designing accessible and inclusive groupware; the Groupware for Collaborative Virtual Environments (G4CVE) method [25], focused on the development of collaborative virtual environments; Tesperanto [26,27], a model-based methodology for authoring technical documents; the Designing for Awareness in Shared Systems (DASS) framework [28], which gives a structured and comprehensive overview of design considerations for awareness, thus introduc-ing interaction designers to awareness into a more generalizable and operational design knowledge; Unified Modeling Languages (UML) extensions such as the TOUCHE proposal [29][30][31], whose conceptual framework incorporates a series of requirement templates that include new information to record specific characteristics of groupware systems; and the Collaborative System Requirement Modeling Framework (CSRMF), inspired by the i* notation [32], which proposes the CSRML notation [9,33]. Nevertheless, most of these works deal with other domains or are focused on the technological aspects of the systems, without addressing the development of collaborative learning scenarios, neither incorporating an adequate and complete awareness support (only the CSRMF and the DASS frameworks do), nor pedagogical usability support (the CUA method only incorporates usability patterns, but not the pedagogical one).…”

Joint Action Storyboards

“…In identifying such cases, it is useful to keep in mind the communication and coordination mechanisms [39], e.g. verbal/non-verbal messages or data transfer, and collaborative work styles [24,38,44] that are important in the progression of the collaborative task. Since a given instance is to be analyzed according to the exact series of actions by the participants, the instances should be short-lived, i.e.…”