In formation: Support for flexibility, mobility, collaboration, and coherence

Büscher, Monika; Kramp, Gunnar; Krogh, Peter Gall

doi:10.1007/s00779-003-0231-1

Cited by 12 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 9 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…This is well known from prior studies in sociology, anthropology, and computer-supported cooperative work (Bertelsen & Bødker, 2002;Büscher, Kramp, & Krogh, 2003;Bowers, Button, & Sharrock, 1995;Goodwin & Goodwin, 1997), although HCI has had an inclination to analyze Mediators separately, if at all, in a practical setting. What our approach offers is a detailed and systematic method for characterizing such assemblages.…”

mentioning

confidence: 92%

Complex Mediation

Bødker

Andersen

2005

Human-Comp. Interaction

106

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article has its starting point in a large number of empirical findings regarding computer-mediated work. These empirical findings have challenged our understanding of the role of mediation in such work; on the one hand as an aspect of communication and cooperation at work and on the other hand as an aspect of human engagement with instruments of work. On the basis of previous work in activity-theoretical and semiotic human-computer interaction, we propose a model to encompass both of these aspects. In a dialogue with our empirical findings we move on to propose a number of types of mediation that have helped to enrich our understanding of mediated work and the design of computer mediation for such work.

show abstract

mentioning

confidence: 92%

Complex Mediation

Bødker

Andersen

2005

Human-Comp. Interaction

106

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…One thing linguistic and ethnographic studies share is an emphasis on how a given practice is part of a larger collection of other ordinary activities. These might include talking (Oak 2011;Adams and Siddiqui 2016), drawing (Mondada 2012), using tools (Büscher et al 2003;Luff et al 2009;Lymer et al 2009), gesticulation (Murphy 2003;Streeck 2008), pointing (Murphy et al 2012) or seeing (Goodwin 1994;Büscher 2006;Styhre 2011;Luck 2014). Research into interactional grammar questions how something like valuation is constituted through these other activities.…”

Section: The Interactionist Grammar Of Valuementioning

confidence: 99%

Design and the Polysemy of Value: On a problem within the language of valuation studies

Coughlan

2023

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Value and valuation are notoriously difficult terms, because they mean very different things in different contexts for different scholars. This problem can be described in linguistic terms as “polysemy”. In this article, I propose to reformulate the problem of value through the lens of polysemy as a problem within language. I offer an alternative to approaches that either narrow down value to one particular definition or disregard it altogether, turning value into a container concept for a variety of concerns. I seek thereby to avoid the twin risks of fragmentation or smothering. Following the lead of ordinary language philosophy, I distinguish between three different “grammars of value”. Scholars address value differently depending on their grammar. This shows best in the ways they present value as an intuitively intelligible phenomenon, and in the ways in which they challenge such intuitive understandings of value in their studies. To illustrate these grammatical distinctions, I refer to ethnographic studies of design practices, including excerpts from my own research in a German architecture office.

show abstract

“…the customer, and the ailing device itself-to bridge the current dislocations. This is an approach similar to that taken by for example Buscher et al (2003) in ubiquitous computing: an attempt to make "available and 'inhabitable' as much as possible of the configurations of reference materials and features, people's orientation, gestures, pointing and talk in relation to them." (139).…”

Section: Designing Embedded Troubleshooting Toolsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Designing Technology as an Embedded Resource for Troubleshooting

Castellani

Grasso

O’Neill

et al. 2009

Comput Supported Coop Work

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In this paper we describe a number of technologies which we designed to provide support for customers troubleshooting problems with their office devices. The technologies aim to support both self-conducted and expert-supported troubleshooting and to provide a seamless route from one type of support to another. The designs are grounded in the findings of an ethnographic study of a troubleshooting call centre for office devices. We examine the properties of different assemblies of people, resources, technologies and spaces to inspire design for the different troubleshooting situations. Through our fieldwork and our technology envisionments we uncovered a number of dislocations between various aspects of the troubleshooting assemblies: (1) a physical dislocation between the site of the problem and the site of problem resolution; (2) a conceptual dislocation between the users' knowledge and the troubleshooting resources and (3) a logical dislocation between the support resources and the status of the ailing device itself. The technologies that we propose attempt to address these dislocations by embedding the troubleshooting resources in the device itself, thus harmonizing the various elements and capturing, where possible, the haecceities-the 'just thisness'-of each particular troubleshooting situation.

show abstract

In formation: Support for flexibility, mobility, collaboration, and coherence

Cited by 12 publications

References 9 publications

Complex Mediation

Complex Mediation

Design and the Polysemy of Value: On a problem within the language of valuation studies

Designing Technology as an Embedded Resource for Troubleshooting

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About