Syllabus

Week 1 - Media Richness

 March 17 (No class: Learning@Scale & CSCW). Please do all the March 19 readings before the first class.

 March  19: Organizational Meeting

[Slides] Rather than go through each paper individually, we'll spend most of the class period asking some higher-level questions: what is rich, multimedia communication interpersonal communication good for and when is it valuable?  We'll also contrast the value of theory (Clark & Brennan) and more ad hoc hypothesizing (Daft & Lengel; Hollan & Stornetta) in informing HCI research.  Come to class prepared to discuss these themes.

  1. Chapanis, A. (1975). Interactive human communication. Scientific American, 232, 36-42.
  2. Daft, R., & Lengel, R. (1986). Organizational information requirements, media richness and structural design. Management Science, 32(5), 554-571.
  3. Hollan, J., & Stornetta, S. (1992). Beyond Being There. Proceedings of ACM CHI'92 Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, (pp. 119-125). New York: ACM Press.
  4. Clark, Herbert H. & Brennan, Susan E. (1991). Grounding in communication. In L. B. Resnick, R. M. Levine, & S. D. Teasley (Eds.).Perspectives on socially shared cognition. (pp. 127-149). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
  5. Gergle, D., Kraut, R. E., & Fussell, S. R. (2012). Using Visual Information for Grounding and Awareness in Collaborative Tasks. Human Computer Interaction, 28(1), 1-39. 

 Week 2 - Organizations and Collaborative Work

 Mar 24: Coordination in work groups [Slides]

  1.   Malone, T., & Crowston, K. (1994). The interdisciplinary study of coordination. ACM Computing Surveys, 26(1), 87-119. 
    [For the discussion leader:  Crowston, K., Rubleske, J., & Howison, J. (2006). Coordination Theory: A Ten-Year Retrospective. In P. Zhang & D. Galletta (Eds.), Human-Computer Interaction in Management Information Systems(pp. 120-138). Armonk, New York: M. E. Sharpe}

    The original Malone & Crowston paper gives a more complete overview of their proposal that the mechanisms behind coordination are common across domain.  The Crowston et al 2006 paper summarizes the original and tries to describe the impact it had.  The class should read the original 1994 article and the discussion leader should also read the 2006 Crowston paper.
     
  2. Heath, C., & Luff, P. (1992). Collaboration and control: Crisis management and multimedia technology in London Underground Line Control Rooms. Computer Supported Cooperative Work (CSCW), 1(1-2), 69-94
  3. Hinds, P. J., & Bailey, D. E. (2003). Out of sight, out of sync: Understanding conflict in distributed teams. Organization Science, 14(6), 615-632. OR  Hinds, P., & Mortensen, M. (2005). Understanding Conflict in Geographically Distributed Teams: The Moderating Effects of Shared Identity, Shared Context, and Spontaneous Communication. Organization Science, 16(3), 290.

    The Hinds & Bailey paper is a big-picture, literature review, discussing the elements in distributed work that can lead to both productive task-conflict and destructive relationship-conflict in distributed groups.  In contrast, the Hinds & Mortensen paper is an detailed empirical article comparing conflict in 22 collocated and 21 distributed teams.  

 Mar 26: Organizational communication [Slides]
(note, class will start at 11, so you can attend  Attend Katie Pine’s HCII job talk at 10am in GHC 6115)

  1.  Suchman, L. (1983). Office procedure as practical action: models of work and system design. ACM Transactions on Information Systems (TOIS), 1(4), 320 - 328
  2. Ducheneaut, N., & Watts, L. A. (2005). In search of coherence: A review of e-mail research. Human-Computer Interaction, 20(1-2), 11-48.
  3. Pine, K. (2012). Fragmentation and choreography: caring for a patient and a chart during childbirth Proceedings of the ACM 2012 conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work (pp. 887-896). NY: ACM.  Attend Katie Pine’s HCII job talk on March 26, 10-11am in GHC 6115.  

 Week 3 - Social networks

 March 31: Social networks [Slides]

  1. Easley, D., & Kleinberg, J. (2010). Networks, crowds, and markets: Reasoning about a highly connected world: Cambridge Univ Pr. (Chapters 3 & 4).
  2. Burt, R. (1997). The Contingent Value of Social Capital. Administrative Science Quarterly, 42(2). The Burt article is long.  You only need to read  up to but not including the section on Contingency Factors (pag 43). 
  3. Hossain, L., Wu, A., & Chung, K. K. S. (2006). Social networks and coordination patterns: Actor centrality correlates to project based coordination. In CSCW 06: Proceedings of the ACM conference on computer supported cooperative work. New York: ACM Press.
  4. Optional: Bakshy, E., Rosenn, I., Marlow, C., & Adamic, L. (2012). The role of social networks in information diffusion Proceedings of the 21st international conference on World Wide Web. (pp. 519-528). NY:: ACM.

 April 2: Social network analysis for diagnosis [Slides]

  1. Cataldo, M., Wagstrom, P., Herbsleb, J. D., & Carley, K. (2006). Identification of coordination requirements: Implications for the design of collaboration and awareness tools. Proceedings, ACM Conference on Computer-Supported Cooperative Work (pp. 353-362). New York: ACM Press
  2. Ehrlich, K., Lin, C.-Y., & Griffiths-Fisher, V. (2007). Searching for experts in the enterprise: combining text and social network analysis Proceedings of the 2007 international ACM conference on Supporting group work (pp. 117-126): ACM 
  3. Zhang, J., Ackerman, M. S., & Adamic, L. (2007). Expertise networks in online communities: structure and algorithms. Proceedings of the 16th international conference on World Wide Web. (pp. 221-230). NY: ACM.
  4. Optional: Mislove, A., Marcon, M., Gummadi, K. P., Druschel, P., & Bhattacharjee, B. (2007). Measurement and analysis of online social networks Proceedings of the 7th ACM SIGCOMM conference on Internet measurement (pp. 29-42): ACM.

Week 4 - Online communities 

April 7: Growth and survival 

  1. optional: Katz, M. L., & Shapiro, C. (1994). Systems competition and network effects. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 8(2), 93-115.  [This is an important, classic paper, but the Chen et al chapter summarized some of the important insights.]
  2. Resnick, P.Konstan, J., Chen, Y. & Kraut, R.  (2012). Starting a Community. In R. E. Kraut & P. Resnick (Eds.), Evidence-based social design: Mining the social sciences to build online communities. Cambridge MA: MIT Press. 
  3. Kairam, S., Wang, D. J., & Leskovec, J. (2012). Life and death of online groups: Predicting group growth and longevity WSDM'12: Proceedings of the ACM conference on web search and data mining. NY: ACM.
  4. Halfaker, A., Geiger, S., Jonathan, M., & Riedl, J. (2012). The rise and decline of an open collaboration system: How Wikipedia’s reaction to sudden popularity is causing its decline. American Behavioral Scientist, 57(5), 664–688 

April 9: Participation patterns - socialization and identity 

  1. Kraut, R. E., Burke, M., Riedl, J., & Resnick, P. (2012). Dealing with Newcomers In R. E. Kraut & P. Resnick (Eds.), Evidence-based social design: Mining the social sciences to build online communities. Cambridge MA: MIT Press. 
  2. Bryant, S.L., Forte, A., & Bruckman, A. (2005). Becoming Wikipedian: Transformation of Participation in a Collaborative Online Encyclopedia., in Proceedings GROUP 2005, November 6-9, 2005, Sanibel Island, Florida, USA.
  3. Panciera, K., Halfaker, A., & Terveen, L. (2009). Wikipedians are born, not made: A study of power editors on Wikipedia Proceedings of the ACM 2009 international conference on supporting group work table of contents (pp. 51-60 ). New York: ACM Press 

April 11 midnight, Wikipedia assignment due.

Week 5 - Social impact of technology  

[Slides]April 14: Social media and online relationships 

  1. Berscheid, E., & Reis, H. T. (1998). Attraction and close relationships. In D. T. Gilbert, S. T. Fiske & et al. (Eds.), The handbook of social psychology, Vol 2 (4th ed., pp. 193-281). New York, NY, US: McGraw-Hill. {Note that this is a long review chapter.  You only need to read the following sections:  Study of interpersonal relationship, p. 193. Conception of relationship. P. 197-203. Relationship beginnings, p. 203-210. Theories of relationship development, p. 222-226. Relationship satisfaction & stability, p. 229-243.

  2.  Gilbert, E., & Karahalios, K. (2009). Predicting tie strength with social media CHI'09: Proceedings of the ACM Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (pp. 211-220). New York, NY, USA: ACM Press. 
    OR
    Burke, M., & Kraut, R. E. (2014). Growing closer on Facebook: Changes in tie strength through social network site use. CHI'14: Proceedings of the ACM Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. NY: ACM. 

  3. McKenna, K., Green, A. S., & Gleason, M. (2002). Relationship formation on the Internet: What's the big attraction? J. Social Issues, 58(1), 9-31. 

[Slides]April 16: Social capital and well-being 

  1. Putnam, R. D. (1995). Tuning in, tuning out: The strange disappearance of social capital in America. PS: Political Science and Politics, 28(4), 664-683. 
  2. Ellison, N., Steinfeld, C., & Lampe, C. (2007). The benefit of Facebook 'Friends': Social capital and college students use of social network sites, Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication,
  3. Burke, M., Kraut, R. E., & Marlow, C. (2011). Social capital on Facebook: Differentiating uses and users CHI'2011: Proceedings of the ACM Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. [Note: Don't bother reading if you've read Burke, M., & Kraut, R. E. (2014). Growing closer on Facebook. They are similar.]
    OR 
    Kraut, R. Patterson, M., Lundmark, V., Kiesler, S, Mukophadhyay,T & Scherlis, W. (1998). Internet paradox: A social technology that reduces social involvement and psychological well-being? American Psychologist. 53 (9), 10171-031. [Note, read this one if you've already read Burke, M., & Kraut, R. E. (2014), for Tuesday's class.]

 Week 6: Collaborative Learning  

April 21: Benefits of collaborative learning 

  1. Johnson, D. W., & Johnson, R. T. (2009). An educational psychology success story: Social interdependence theory and cooperative learning. Educational researcher, 38(5), 365-379.
  2. Kreijns, K., Kirschner, P. A., & Jochems, W. (2003). Identifying the pitfalls for social interaction in computer-supported collaborative learning environments: a review of the research. Computers in Human Behavior, 19(3), 335-353. 
  3. Cho, K., & Schunn, C. D. (2007). Scaffolded writing and rewriting in the discipline: A web-based reciprocal peer review system. Computers & Education, 48(3), 409-426.
  4. Kulkarni, C., Bernstein, M. S., & Klemmer, S. (2015). PeerStudio: Rapid Peer Feedback Emphasizes Revision and Improves Performance Proceedings of the Second (2015) ACM Conference on Learning@ Scale (pp. 75-84): ACM.

April 23: Designing for collaborative learning [Vincent Aleven]

  1. Fischer, F., Kollar, I., Stegmann, K., & Wecker, C. (2013). Toward a script theory of guidance in computer-supported collaborative learning. Educational Psychologist, 48(1), 56-66.
  2. Dillenbourg, P. (2002). Over-scripting CSCL: The risks of blending collaborative learning with instructional design. Three worlds of CSCL. Can we support CSCL?, 61-91.
  3. Coetzee, D., Lim, S., Fox, A., Hartmann, B., & Hearst, M. A. (2015).Structuring Interactions for Large-Scale Synchronous Peer Learning. Paper presented at the CSCW: ACM Conference on Computer Supported Collaborative Work.
  4. Gweon, G., Rose, C., Carey, R., & Zaiss, Z. (2006). Providing support for adaptive scripting in an on-line collaborative learning environment Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on Human Factors in computing systems (pp. 251-260): ACM

Week 7 - Theory in CSCW and Information Systems 

April 28: Technology adoption [slides]

  1. Venkatesh, V., Morris, M. G., Davis, G. B., & Davis, F. D. (2003). User acceptance of information technology: Toward a unified view. MIS Quarterly, 27(3), 425-478
  2. Grudin, J. (1988). Why CSCW applications fail: Problems in the design and evaluation of organizational interfaces. In Proceedings of the ACM Conference on Computer-Supported Cooperative Work, CSCW 1988, New York: ACM Press. 
  3. Rogers, E. (1995). Chapter 1: Elements of diffusion. The diffusion of innovations. (p 1.-37) New York: Free Press.   

April 30: Theorizing the artifact [slides]

  1. Gregor, S. (2006). The nature of theory in information systems. Management Information Systems Quarterly, 30(3), 611. 
  2. Hevner, A.R., March, S.T., Ram, S., & Park, J. (2004). Design Science in Information Systems Research. MIS Quarterly, 28(1), 75-105, 75-105.
  3. Corley, K. G., & Gioia, D. A. (2011). Building theory about theory building: what constitutes a theoretical contribution? Academy of management review, 36(1), 12-32.