Study and analysis of workspace awareness in CDebate: a groupware application for collaborative debates

Romero-Salcedo, Manuel; Osuna-Gómez, Cesar A.; Sheremetov, Leonid; Villa, Luis; Morales, Carlos Alberto González; Rocha, Luís A.; Chi, Manuel

doi:10.1016/j.intcom.2004.07.004

Cited by 10 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 6 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Although there are differences between these forms of awareness and their definitions, their main commonality is their focus on information, or rather, the lack thereof in CSCL environments. In CSCL environments, it is often difficult to obtain information about what the other is doing, whether he/she is available for communication and interaction, what the others know about the task at hand, what group members will do next, and so on (Romero-Salcedo et al, 2004). In this study we focus on group awareness, which can be defined as knowledge about the social and collaborative environment the person is working in (e.g., knowledge about the activities, presence or participation of group members; see Buder & Bodermer, 2008).…”

Section: Using Group Awareness Toolsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Group awareness tools: It’s what you do with it that matters

Janssen

Erkens

Kirschner

2011

Computers in Human Behavior

121

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study examined the effect of using a group awareness tool on online collaboration. Furthermore, we examined whether the effect of using a group awareness tool on online collaboration is mediated by group awareness (i.e., students' awareness of their group members' levels of participation). To answer these questions, we determined how often and how long 107 secondary education students used the Participation-tool (PT), a group awareness tool designed to visualize group members' relative contribution to the online collaborative process. Our analyses show that duration of PT use (how long students displayed the tool on their screens) significantly predicted group members' participation in the online dialogue, their participation when writing collaborative texts, equality of participation within the group, and coordination and regulation of activities in the relational space (i.e., discussing the collaboration process with group members). No effect of using the PT on group performance was found. Mediation analyses showed that the effect of using the PT is only partially mediated by group awareness: an indirect effect of using the PT, via enhanced group awareness, on student participation during chat discussions and the collaborative writing process was found.

show abstract

Section: Using Group Awareness Toolsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Group awareness tools: It’s what you do with it that matters

Janssen

Erkens

Kirschner

2011

Computers in Human Behavior

121

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Some studies focus on developing groupware and evaluation methods for a specific organization and investigate the effect of collaborative software on groupwork (Christensen and Ellingsen 2014;Pargman 2003;Pinelle et al 2003;Silsand et al 2012;Tang et al 1994;Van der Veer and Weile 2000). Other research focuses on how specific features, particularly awareness supporting features, influence usability (Gutwin et al 1996;Greenberg 1998, 1999;Lopez and Guerrero 2017;Ignat et al 2015;Passos et al 2017;Romero-Salcedo et al 2004). Pinelle (2000) reviews and compares groupware evaluation methods in detail, based on several factors, such as the type of groupware and the methods used in the evaluation and placement of evaluation in the software evaluation process.…”

Section: Related Workmentioning

confidence: 99%

Empirical study of Team Usability Testing: a laboratory experiment

2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The evaluation of groupware has a long history; several researchers have investigated this research area and made attempts to develop evaluation methods. This paper aims to make a contribution to this research topic by introducing a groupware evaluation method called Team Usability Testing. The goal of this method is to evaluate the usability of real-time distributed groupware. The Team Usability Test consists of a combination of questionnaires, on-screen behaviour recordings and interviews. The data analysis is based on the mechanics of collaboration theoretical framework and involves communication analysis, behaviour analysis, and analysis of post-experiment interviews. A laboratory experiment and a field study constitute the two main phases of the creation of the usability testing method. In this paper, the results of the laboratory experiment and its implications for the field study will be discussed. According to the results, the Team Usability Test is able to explore team-level usability problems and contextual problems. The paper ends with the discussion of future field research considerations related to the possible application of the Team Usability Test in real-life work settings. Keywords HCI design and evaluation methods-laboratory experiments • HCI design and evaluation methods-usability testing • Computer-supported cooperative work • Empirical studies in collaborative and social computing * Dalma Geszten

show abstract

A review of awareness in distributed collaborative software engineering

et al. 2010

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Software development projects are inherently cooperative, requiring many developers to coordinate their efforts to produce complex systems. An integral part of this process is the development and maintenance of a shared understanding concerning the state of software project tasks, artefacts, and the activities and expertise of developers working on the project. In co-located settings, this vital awareness information that concerns developers, either directly or tangentially, is typically acquired using formal, regular meetings, informal personal interruptions and electronic communication. Developing and maintaining such an awareness are far more difficult in distributed teams where developers are separated by time and space. The goal of this review is to help bridge the gap between the theoretical benefits of distributed collaborative software development and the practical impediments to successful implementation, and more specifically, achieving similar levels of awareness in distributed settings to those available in co-located settings. The review starts with a detailed discussion of awareness and awareness types with particular relevance to collaboration. This is followed by a discussion of how awareness information is disseminated during collaborative processes. Awareness information needs and dissemination mechanisms in software development teams are then presented. The main contribution of the review, derived from a comparison of awareness needs in distributed collaborative software engineering and current support from tools and techniques, is that more support is required for the type of awareness known as context awareness. Context awareness crosscuts other (more basic) forms of awareness and arises because, over time, individual collaborators work on different sets of tasks and artefacts and form different perceptions of their colleagues; their colleagues' work, roles, and relationships; and, the workspace. This awareness is highly contextual and therefore cannot be generalized across individuals, entities or activities that are found in a collaboration space

show abstract

Study and analysis of workspace awareness in CDebate: a groupware application for collaborative debates

Cited by 10 publications

References 6 publications

Group awareness tools: It’s what you do with it that matters

Group awareness tools: It’s what you do with it that matters

Empirical study of Team Usability Testing: a laboratory experiment

A review of awareness in distributed collaborative software engineering

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About