Construction of interaction observation systems for collaboration analysis in groupware applications. (English) Zbl 1187.68066
Summary: Interaction observation systems for groupware applications capture and process all the actions performed by users engaged in workgroups. These actions are then stored in log documents that enable the work process carried out by the users to be analyzed and the interaction between users to be studied. This article proposes an approach, based on ontological models, which is devised to help the developer of an observation system for a groupware application to structure and record user actions. In order to achieve this aim, we present a specific ontology that shapes the collaborative work process of the users so as to obtain an XML-based log document that stores all the actions carried out by the users and facilitates the subsequent analysis of the system usage and users’ behavior. This approach has been used to improve communication and collaboration capabilities in the COLLECE groupware application.
MSC:
| 68M11 | Internet topics |
References:
| [1] | Barcellini F, Détienne, F., Burkhardt JM, Sack W. Visualizing roles and design interactions in an open source software community. In: Workshop on supporting the Social Side of large software system development at ACM conference on computer supported cooperative work, Banff; 2006. |
| [2] | Begole JB, Tang JC, Smith RB, Yankelovich N. Work rhythms: analyzing visualizations of awareness histories of distributed groups. In: Proceedings of the ACM conference on computer supported cooperative work, New Orleans; 2002. p. 334 – 43. |
| [3] | Bratitsis T, Dimitracopoulou A. Monitoring and analysing group interactions in asynchronous discussions with the DIAS system. In: Dimitriadis Y, Zigurs I, Gomez-Sanchez E, editors. Proceedings of the 12th international workshop on groupware: design, implementation and use, Medina Del Campo, Spain; 2006. p. 54 – 61. |
| [4] | Bravo C, Duque R, Gallardo J, García J, García P. A groupware system for distributed collaborative programming: usability issues and lessons learned. In: Van Hillegersberg J, Harmsen F, Amrit C, Geisberger E, Keil P, Kuhrmann M, editors. Proceedings of the international workshop on tools support and requirements management for globally distributed software development, Munich; 2007. p. 50 – 6. |
| [5] | Bravo, C.; Redondo, M. A.; Verdejo, M. F.; Ortega, M.: Framework for process and solution analysis in synchronous collaborative learning environments, Int J hum-comput stud 66, No. 11, 812-832 (2008) |
| [6] | Convertino G, Moran TP, Smith BA. Studying activity patterns in CSCW. In: Rosson MB, Gilmore DJ, editors. Extended abstracts of the conference on human factors in computing systems, San José; 2007. p. 2339 – 44. |
| [7] | Drummond N, Rector AL, Stevens R, Moulton G, Horridge M, Wang H, Seidenberg J. Putting OWL in order: patterns for sequences in OWL. In: Proceedings of the second OWL experiences and directions workshop, Athens, Georgia, USA; 2006. |
| [8] | Duque R, Bravo C. Analyzing work productivity and program quality in collaborative programming. In: Mannaert H, Ohta T, Dini C, Pellerin R, editors. Proceeding of the third international conference on software engineering advances, Sliema; 2008. p. 270 – 6. |
| [9] | Duque, R.; Bravo, C.; Gallardo, J.; Giraldo, W. J.; Ortega, M.: Modelling and capturing users’ actions in CSCL systems for analysis purposes, Int J emerg technol learn 4, No. 1, 53-59 (2009) |
| [10] | Duque, R.; Bravo, C.: A method to classify collaboration in CSCL systems, Lecture notes in computer science 4431, 649-656 (2007) |
| [11] | Dyke G, Kristine Lund K, Girardot JJ. Analysing face to face computer-mediated interactions. In: Csapó B, Csíkos, C, editors. Proceedings of the 12th biennial conference for research on learning and instruction, Budapest; 2007. |
| [12] | Ellis, C. A.; Gibbs, S. J.; Rein, G. L.: Groupware: some issues and experiences, Communications of the ACM 34, No. 1, 38-58 (1991) |
| [13] | Gaaloul W, Alaoui S, Baina K, Godart C. Mining workflow patterns through event-data analysis. In: Proceedings of the symposium on applications and the internet workshops; 2005. p. 226 – 9. |
| [14] | Ganoe CH, Somervell JP, Neale DC, Isenhour PL, Carroll JM, Rosson MB, McCrickard DS. Classroom BRIDGE: using collaborative public and desktop timelines to support activity awareness. In: Proceedings of the 16th annual ACM symposium on user interface software and technology, Vancouver; 2003. p. 21 – 30. |
| [15] | Garrido JL, Gea M, Rodríguez ML. Requirements engineering in cooperative systems. In: Requirements. Engineering for sociotechnical systems, Chapter XIV, IDEA GROUP, USA; 2005. p. 226 – 44. |
| [16] | Gruber, T. R.: A translation approach to portable ontology specifications, Knowledge acquisition 5, 199-220 (1993) |
| [17] | Grudin J. Why CSCW applications fail: problems in the design and evaluation of organization of organizational interfaces. In: Proceedings of the ACM conference on computer-supported cooperative work, Seattle, USA; 1988. p. 85 – 93. |
| [18] | Grudin, J.: Computer-supported cooperative work: history and focus, IEEE comput 27, No. 5, 19-26 (1994) |
| [19] | Guarino, N.: Understanding, building, and using ontologies: a commentary to ’using explicit ontologies in KBS development’, by Van heijst, schreiber, and wielinga, Int J hum comput stud, No. 46, 293-310 (1997) |
| [20] | Guarino N. Formal ontology and information systems. In: Guarino N, editor. Proceedings of international conference on formal ontology in information system, Trento, Italy; 1998. p. 3 – 15. |
| [21] | Gutwin C, Roseman M, Greenberg S. A usability study of awareness widgets in a shared workspace groupware system. In: Proceedings of the ACM conference on computer supported cooperative work, Boston, USA; 1996. p. 258 – 67. |
| [22] | Gutwin C, Greenberg S. Effects of awareness support on groupware usability. In: Proceedings of the conference on computer human interaction. California, USA: ACM Press; 1998. p. 511 – 8. |
| [23] | Gutwin C, Penner R, Schneider K. Group awareness in distributed software development. In: Proceedings of the ACM conference on computer supported cooperative work, Chicago, USA; 2004. p. 72 – 81. |
| [24] | Gutwin, C.; Schneider, K.; Paquette, D.; Penner, R.: Supporting group awareness in distributed software development, Engineering human computer interaction and interactive systems. Lecture notes in computer science 3425, 383-397 (2005) |
| [25] | Kristoffersen S, Ljungberg F. An empirical study of how people establish interaction: implications for CSCW session management models. In: Altom MW, Williams MG, editors. Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on human factors in computing systems: the CHI is the limit, Pittsburgh;1999. p. 1 – 8. |
| [26] | Marcos J, Martíınez A, Dimitriadis Y, Anguita R. Interaction analysis for the detection and support of participatory roles in CSCL. In: Dimitriadis Y, Zigurs I, Gomez-Sanchez E, editors. Proceedings of the 12th international workshop on groupware: design, implementation and use, Medina Del Campo, Spain; 2006. p. 155 – 62. |
| [27] | Martínez A, Dimitriadis Y, de la Fuente P. Towards an XML-based model for the representation of collaborative action. In: Wasson B, Ludvigsen S, Hoppe U, editors. Proceedings of the conference on computer support for collaborative learning, Bergen; 2003. p. 14 – 8. |
| [28] | Noguera M, Hurtado MV, Garrido JL. An ontology-based scheme enabling the modeling of cooperation in business processes. Lecture Notes in Computer Science 2006;4277:863 – 72. |
| [29] | Noguera M, Hurtado MV, Rodríguez M., Chung L, Garrido JL. Description of collaborative processes using OWL-DL. In: Proceedings of the international conference on software engineering research and practice, Las Vegas, Estados Unidos; 2007. p. 574 – 80. |
| [30] | OMG. Unified modeling language: superstructure, version 2.1.1 (with change bars), formal/2007-02-03. <http://www.omg.org/cgi-bin/doc?formal/07-02-03> [accessed 09.12.08]. |
| [31] | Roda, C.; Thomas, J.: Attention aware systems: theories, applications and research agenda, Computers in human behavior 22, No. 4, 557-587 (2006) |
| [32] | Schreiber G, Wielinga B, Akkermans H, Van de Velde, W, Anjewierden, A. CML: The commonKADS conceptual modelling language. A future for knowledge acquisition, eighth European knowledge acquisition workshop. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 867, Springer-Verlag, Berlin; 1994. p. 1 – 25. |
| [33] | Steves, M. P.; Scholtz, J.: Modified field studies for CSCW systems, SIGGROUP bull 20, No. 2, 36-39 (1999) |
| [34] | Tam, J.; Greenberg, S.: A framework for asynchronous change awareness, collaborative documents and workspaces, Int J hum comput stud 64, No. 7, 583-598 (2006) |
| [35] | Van Der Aalst, W. M. P.: Exploring the CSCW spectrum using process mining, Adv eng inform 21, No. 2, 191-199 (2007) |
| [36] | Viégas FB, Wattenberg M, Kushal D. Studying cooperation and conflict between authors with history flow visualizations. In: Dykstra-Erickson E, Tscheligi, M, editors. Proceedings of the 2004 conference on human factors in computing systems, Vienna; 2004. p. 575 – 82. |
| [37] | W3C. OWL Web Ontology Language Guide. W3C recommendation. <http://www.w3.org/TR/owl-guide/> [accessed 09.12.08]. |
| [38] | W3C. Defining N-ary relations on the semantic web. W3C working group note. <http://www.w3.org/TR/swbp-n-aryRelations/> [accessed 09.12.08]. |
| [39] | Wang XH, Zhang DQ, Gu T, Pung HK. Ontology based context modeling and reasoning using OWL. In: Proceedings of the second IEEE annual conference on pervasive computing and communications workshops; 2004. p. 18 – 22. |
| [40] | Williams, L.; Kessler, R.: Pair programming illuminated, (2002) · Zbl 1020.68944 |
| [41] | Zhou C, Chia LT, Lee BS. DAML-QoS ontology for web services. In: Proceedings of the IEEE international conference on web services; 2004. p. 472 – 9. |
This reference list is based on information provided by the publisher or from digital mathematics libraries. Its items are heuristically matched to zbMATH identifiers and may contain data conversion errors. In some cases that data have been complemented/enhanced by data from zbMATH Open. This attempts to reflect the references listed in the original paper as accurately as possible without claiming completeness or a perfect matching.
