In this paper the authors study three different modes of CSCW, a laptop mode, the table top mode and physical mode of interaction, comparing the quality and quantity of interactions of several groups of participants. While the results of the study are useful, they do not quite provide information to help design better systems for collaborative work in general.
Here the authors investigate these three different modes for one task. The results they produce provide a overview for that one task and however general that task may be it doesn't reflect the real world tasks that people would do using these different types of interaction. As such it is difficult to say how well their findings hold up to the real world. It would be beneficial to see a study like this taken out to where people do need to do interactive work this we and compare how the different modes affect the outcome of the work.
The authors also focus a great deal on the amount of communication necessary between the participants. In the general case this informative, but it is more a measure of an input to the system (of collaboration) than it is a measure of the output. Again if the authors were to turn to real world problems they might find more informative aspects of collaboration to measure.
In the discussion the authors mention affordances especially for collaborators who are less likely to take on leadership roles and ensuring that entry points are provided equitably. While this is good again for the general case, and is an important consideration it does not again allow for the real world considerations of such a system deployed in a work situation.
No comments:
Post a Comment