Skip navigation.
Home
Social Perspectives on HCI

Syllabus

kraut's picture
Submitted by kraut on Thu, 02/12/2009 - 06:28.

Jan 12: Interpersonal & Organizational Communication

Interpersonal Communication

  1. Clark, H., & Brennan, S. (1991). Grounding in communication. In L. Resnick, J. Levine & S. Teasley (Eds.), Perspectives on socially shared cognition (pp. 127-149). Washington DC: American Psychological Association.

  2. Olson, G. M., & Olson, J. S. (2000). Distance matters. Human-Computer Interaction, 15(2-3), 139-178.

  3. Kraut, R. E., Gergle, D., & Fussell, S. R. (2002). The use of visual information in sharedte visual spaces: Informing the development of virtual co-presence. In Proceedings of the conference on computer supported cooperative work (pp. 31-40). New York: ACM.

Organizational communication

  1. Mintzberg (1990). The manager's job: Folklore and fact. Harvard Business Review, 53(4), 49-61

  2. Sproull, L., & Kiesler, S. (1986). Reducing social context cues: electronic mail in organizational communication. Management Science, 32(11), 1492-1512.

  3. Yates, J., & Orlikowski, W. (1992). Genres of organizational communication: A structurational approach to studying communication and media. Academy of Management Review, 17(2), 299-326.

  4. Kruger, J., Epley, N., Parker, J., & Ng, Z.-W. (2005). Egocentrism over e-mail: Can we communicate as well as we think? Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 89(6), 925-936.

  5. Ducheneaut, N., & Watts, L. A. (2005). In search of coherence: A review of e-mail research. Human-Computer Interaction, 20(1-2), 11-48.

Optional

  1. Kraut, R. E., Fish, R., Root, R., & Chalfonte, B. (1990). Informal communication in organizations: Form, function, and technology. In S. Oskamp & S. Spacapan (Eds.), Human reactions to technology: Claremont symposium on applied social psychology (pp. 145-199). Beverly Hills, CA: Sage Publications.

  2. Whittaker, S., & Sidner, C. (1996). Email overload: Exploring personal information management of email. In CHI 96: Proceedings of the ACM conference on human factors in computing systems (pp. 276 - 283). NY: ACM Press.

Jan 19: No class: Martin Luther King celebration

Jan 26: Coordination in work groups

  1. Malone, T., & Crowston, K. (1994). The interdisciplinary study of coordination. ACM Computing Surveys, 26(1), 87-119. hin[iris]

  2. Malone, T. W., Ken R. Grant, Franklyn A. Turbak, Stephen A. Brobst, and Michael D. Cohen. (1987). Intelligent Information Sharing Systems. Communications of the ACM, 30, 390-402.

  3. Cramton, C. D. (2001). The mutual knowledge problem and its consequences for dispersed collaboration. Organization Science, 12(3), 346-371.

  4. Baltes, B., Dickson, M., Sherman, M., Bauer, C., & LaGanke, J. (2002). Computer-Mediated Communication and Group Decision Making: A Meta-Analysis. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 87(1), 156-179.

  5. Hindmarsh, J., & Pilnick, A. (2002). The Tacit Order of Teamwork: Collaboration and Embodied Conduct In Anesthesia. The Sociological Quarterly, 43(2), 139-164.

  6. Cataldo, M., Wagstrom, P., Herbsleb, J., & Carley, K. (2006). Identification of coordination requirements: implications for the Design of collaboration and awareness tools.

  7. Cummings, J. N., & Kiesler, S. (2007). Coordination costs and project outcomes in multi-university collaborations. Research Policy, 36(10), 1620-1634. [Tawanna Dillahunt]

Feb 2: Awareness & Interruptions

Awareness

  1. Dourish, P., & Bly, S. (1992). Portholes: Supporting awareness in a distributed work group. In Proceedings of CHI 1992: Human factors in computing systems (pp. 541-547). New York: ACM.

  2. Salas, E., Prince, C., Baker, D. P., & Shrestha, L. (1995). Situation awareness in team performance: Implications for measurement and training. Human Factor, 37(1), 123-136

  3. Erickson, T., & Kellogg, W. (2000). Social translucence: an approach to designing systems that support social processes. ACM Transactions on Computer-Human Interaction (TOCHI), 7(1), 59-83.

Interruption

  1. Hudson, S. E., & Smith, I. (1996). Techniques for addressing fundamental privacy and disruption tradeoffs in awareness support systems. Proceedings of the 1996 ACM conference on Computer supported cooperative work, 248-257.

  2. Perlow, L. A. (1999). The time famine: Toward a sociology of work time. Administrative Science Quarterly, 44(1), 57-81.

  3. McFarlane, D. C. (2002). Comparison of Four Primary Methods for Coordinating the Interruption of People in Human-Computer Interaction. Human-Computer Interaction, 17(1), 63-139.

  4. Reeves et al. (2008). A marketplace for attention: Responses to a synthetic currency used to signal information importance in e-mail. First Monday [Eiji Hayashi]

Optional

  1. Wiberg, M., & Whittaker, S. (2005). Managing availability: Supporting lightweight negotiations to handle interruptions. ACM Transactions on Computer-Human Interaction (TOCHI), 12(4), 356 - 387.

  2. Horvitz, E., Kadie, C. M., Paek, T., & Hovel, D. (2003). Models of attention in computing and communication: From principles to applications. Communications of the ACM, 46(3), 52-59.

Feb  9: Social networks

  1. Powell, W. (1991). Neither market nor hierarchy: Network forms of organization. Research in Organizational Behavior, 12, 295-336. [get]

  2. Konstan, J., Miller, B., Maltz, D., Herlocker, J., Gordon, L., & Riedl, J. (1997). GroupLens: applying collaborative filtering to Usenet news. Communications of the ACM, 40(3), 77-87

  3. Ackerman, M. (1998). Augmenting organizational memory: a field study of answer garden. ACM Transactions on Information Systems, 16(3), 203-224. [Tawanna Dillahunt]

  4. Burt, R. (1997). The Contingent Value of Social Capital. Administrative Science Quarterly, 42(2).

  5. Contractor, N., Wasserman, S., & Faust, K. (2006). Testing multi-theoretical multilevel hypotheses about organizational networks: An analytic framework and empirical example. Academy of Management Review, 31, 681-703

  6. 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. [Stephen Oney]

Optional

  1. Wellman, B. (2001). Computer networks as social networks. Science, 293(14 September), 2031-2034.

  2. McDonald, D. W. (2003). Recommending collaboration with social networks: A comparative evaluation. In CHI 04: Proceedings of the ACM conference on human factors in computing systems (pp. 593 - 600). New York: ACM Press. (Chris: Summary)

Feb 16: Theory in CSCW and Information Systems

  1. Carroll, J., & Kellogg, W. (1989). Artifact as theory-nexus: hermeneutics meets theory-based design CHI'89: ACM Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (pp. 7-14). New York, NY: ACM Press.

  2. Kling, R. (2000). Learning about Information Technologies and Social Change: The Contribution of Social Informatics. The Information Society, 16(3), 217-232.

  3. DeSanctis, G., & Poole, M. (1994). Capturing the complexity in advanced technology use: Adaptive structuration theory. Organization Science, 5(2), 121-147.[Chris] and [Bryan Pendleton]

  4. Kuutti, K. (1995). Activity theory as a potential framework for human-computer interaction research. In B. Nardi (Ed.), Context and consciousness: Activity theory and human computer interaction (pp. 17-44.). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.[Eiji Hayashi]

  5. Sutton, R. I., & Staw, B. M. (1995). What theory is not. Administrative Science Quarterly, 40(3), 371-384.[Min Kyung Lee]

  6. Orlikowski, W., & Barley, S. (2001). Technology and institutions. MIS Quarterly, 25, 145-165.[Chris]

  7. Kraut, R. (2003). Applying social psychological theory to the problems of group work. In J. M. Carroll (Ed.), HCI Models, Theories and Frameworks: Toward a Multidisciplinary Science (pp. 325-356). New York: Morgan Kaufman [Bryant Lee]

Optional

  1. Orlikowski, W.& Iacono, S. (2001). Research commentary: Desperately seeking the "IT" in it research-a call to theorizing the it artifact. Information systems research, 12(2), 121-134. (Summary: Bo)

  2. Banker, R. D., & Kauffman, R. J. (2004). The evolution of research on information systems: A fiftieth-year survey of the literature in management science. Management Science, 50(3), 281-298.

Feb 23: What makes information technology succeed?

  1. Grudin, J. (1988). Why CSCW applications fail: Problems in the design and evaluation of organizational interfaces. Paper presented at the Computer-Supported Cooperative Work, 1988, New York. [Sunyoung Kim]

  2. Mahajan, V., Muller, E., & Bass, F. (1990). New product diffusion models in marketing: A review and directions for research. Journal of Marketing, 54, 1-26.

  3. Orlikowski, W. J. (2000). Using technology and constituting structures: A practice lens for studying technology in organizations. Organizational Science, 11(4), 404-428. [chris - i think?]

  4. Rogers, E. (1995). Chapter 1: Elements of diffusion. The diffusion of innovations. (p 1.-37) New York: Free Press. [Tawanna Dillahunt - I don't remember which paper but I know it was one from this section. If this is incorrect, please let me know by Wednesday]

  5. Kraut., R. E., Rice, R. E., Cool, C., & Fish, R. S. (1998). Varieties of social influence: The role of utility and norms in the success of a new communication medium. Organization Science, 9(4), 437-453. [iris]

  6. 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 [Brian Lim]

Mar 2: Social impact of technology

Economic impact

  1. Brynjolfsson, E., & Hitt, L. (1998). Beyond the Productivity Paradox. Communications of the ACM, 41(8), 49-55. [Stacey Kuznetsov]

  2. Dedrick, J., Gurbaxani, V., & Kraemer, K. L. (2003). Information technology and economic performance: A critical review of the empirical evidence. ACM Computing Surveys, 35(1), 1-28. [Stephen Oney]

  3. Leonardi, P. M. (2007). Activating the informational capabilities of information technology for organizational change. Organization Science, 18(5), 813-831.[Min Kyung Lee]

Personal impact

  1. Bargh, J., & McKenna, K. (2004). The Internet and Social Life. Annual Review of Psychology, 55, 573-590. [Eiji Hayashi]

  2. Bessière, K., Kiesler, S., Kraut, R. E., & Boneva, B. (2008). Effects of Internet Use and Social Resources on Changes in Depression. Information, Communication & Society, 11(1), 47 - 70. [Sunyoung Kim]

  1. Gajendran, R., & Harrison, D. (2007). The Good, the Bad, and the Unknown About Telecommuting: Meta-Analysis of Psychological Mediators and Individual Consequences. Journal of applied psychology, 92(6), 1524.[Aubrey Shick]

Optional

  1. Overby, E. (2008). Process Virtualization Theory and the Impact of Information Technology. Organization Science, 19(2), 277-291.

  2. Peslak, A. (2005). The educational productivity paradox. Communications of the ACM, 48(10), 111 - 114