| Introduction to this Issue | | BIB | 3-4 | |
| Barbara Mirel | |||
| When Only the Self is Real: Theory and Practice in the Development Community | | BIBA | 5-10 | |
| Gail Bader; James M. Nyce | |||
| Bader and Nyce draw on their own experience as ethnographers advising those who develop educational software to argue that "it seems unlikely that cultural analysis [of software users] will ever become part of the tool kit developers and programmers habitually draw upon," primarily because "there is...a demonstrable, fundamental gap between the [rule-governed] knowledge the development community values and [the concrete details] which cultural analysis yields." | |||
| A Room With a View | | BIBA | 11-12 | |
| Geoffrey C. Bowker | |||
| In the first of four analytical commentaries that follow Bader and Nyce's focal paper, Geoffrey Bowker offers several counterexamples and suggests the problem involves more impatience than deep epistemological differences. | |||
| Cultural Analysis and What Designers Need To Know | | BIBA | 13-17 | |
| Andrew Dillon | |||
| In a second commentary on Bader and Nyce, Andrew Dillon points out that "the leap from [ethnographic] data to design implication is complex" and that software engineers should not be faulted for making this leap only with care. | |||
| Synthesizing Diverse Perspectives | | BIBA | 18-19 | |
| Mary Beth Rosson | |||
| In a third commentary on Bader and Nyce, Mary Beth Rosson thinks that cultural analysts who employ known "techniques to ensure sharing and synthesis" can indeed influence software development. | |||
| Make Room for Ethnography in Design! | | BIBA | 20-30 | |
| Jesper Simonsen; Finn Kensing | |||
| In a fourth commentary on Bader and Nyce, Jesper Simonsen and Finn Kensing provide their own detailed review of recent projects to argue that, in long-term commercial and educational collaborations, ethnographers can slowly but significantly guide software design by expanding the horizons of software designers. | |||
| Concepts of Cognition and Consciousness: Four Voices | | BIBA | 31-48 | |
| Bonnie A. Nardi | |||
| In a thorough comparative awareness essay enlivened by dry humor and examples drawn from her own career as an applied anthropologist at Apple Computer, Nardi describes the strengths and weaknesses of four theories of consciousness and human cognition: neuroscience, cognitive science, distributed cognition theory, and (her own preference) activity theory. This is a perceptive introductory tour of a very diverse literature, but it also frequently touches on concrete issues in human-computer interaction: "If you design mediating tools for others (such as computer hardware or software)," notes Nardi for example, "you are also responsible, in part, for the consciousness of others" according to activity theory. | |||
| News of the SIG | | BIBA | 49-51 | |
| Kathy Haramundanis | |||
| Introduces the SIGDOC officers elected (or appointed) in mid 1997, and describes the expanded SIGDOC web site. | |||
| Perspectives on and Problems with Computer-Mediated Teamwork: Current Groupware Issues and Assumptions | | BIBA | 3-22 | |
| Rita Vick | |||
| Technologies designed to facilitate teamwork, especially among physically
dispersed teams, are well known but little used. This paper explores the
conceptual background for such "groupware" and for the resistance to using it,
especially among cross-cultural team members at global corporations.
Recognized groupware problems include the heavy cognitive burden of learning
new software, excessive note keeping, organizational lethargy, and conflicts
with the company reward system. Apparent differences among world cultures seem
another likely barrier to international adoption of groupware, but this has
received little empirical study. Vick proposes experiments to detect whether
cultural diversity helps or impedes teamwork, and whether groupware helps or
hinders cross-cultural teams.
Immediately following Vick's paper, three commentators explore its implications. Brent Auernheimer (23-26) points out that (international) software engineering teams provide good test cases for assessing groupware value. J. C. Nordbotten (27-29) agrees that past studies have neglected distributed and heterogeneous teams, but notes the problems of designing sound experiments on this topic. Finally, Raymond Panko and Susan Kinney (30-33) report studies of their own showing that the more satisfied team members are with their current work, the less incentive they have to adopt demanding, expensive new technologies such as groupware. | |||
| Edward Tufte's Visual Explanations: A Tapestry of Images, Comparisons, and Principles | | BIBA | 23-26 | |
| Russell K. Needham | |||
| Needham notes that while Tufte's book is rich in examples, its real strength is in his extraction of general design principles from them that have pedagogical value. | |||
| GSS, Professional Culture, Geography, and Software Engineering | | BIBA | 23-26 | |
| Brent Auernheimer | |||
| In the first of three commentaries on Vick, Auernheimer points out that international software engineering teams themselves provide good test cases for assessing the value of groupware. | |||
| Perspectives on Groupware for Cross-Cultural Teams | | BIBA | 27-29 | |
| J. C. Nordbotten | |||
| In the second of three commentaries on Vick, Nordbotten agrees that past studies have neglected distributed and heterogeneous teams, but notes the problems of designing really effective experiments on this topic. | |||
| Satisfaction, Technology Adoption, and Performance in Project Teams | | BIBA | 30-33 | |
| Raymond R. Panko; Susan T. Kinney | |||
| In the third of three commentaries on Vick, Panko and Kinney report their own studies showing that the more satisfied team members are with their current work, the less incentive they have to adopt demanding, expensive new technologies such as groupware. | |||
| Visual Meaning: Commentaries on the Continuing Influence of Edward R. Tufte | | BIBA | 34 | |
| Robert R. Johnson | |||
| Introduction to this issue's book commentaries. | |||
| Perspectives on Visual Explanations | | BIBA | 35-38 | |
| Nancy Allen | |||
| Allen raises three questions about the rhetorical character of Tufte's analysis of visual displays. | |||
| Metaphor Design in User Interfaces | | BIBA | 43-57 | |
| Aaron Marcus | |||
| Marcus draws on his considerable consulting experience to give a practitioner's tour of metaphor use in computer interfaces. He introduces the relevant terms and distinctions as background, then summarizes the history of metaphors in computing, noting both advantages (borrowed familiarity) and disadvantages (failure to transfer easily across cultures). The discussion culminates in a detailed, thoroughly illustrated case study of how Marcus and his colleagues iteratively developed suitable metaphors for use in software to assist travel agents. He also includes over two dozen references on metaphor related to user interfaces. | |||
| SIGDOC98 Conference Update | | BIBA | 58-60 | |
| Laurie Bennett | |||
| Where to find program and Quebec City information. | |||
| The User Edit: Making Manuals Easier to Use | | BIBA | 5-6 | |
| Marshall Atlas | |||
| This classic reprint makes available again the concise, innovative, 1981
paper in which Marshall Atlas explains the design benefits of tracking with
protocol analysis the attempts of an actual user to try following the
instructions in a draft manual before the manual's first version is published.
Immediately following Atlas's paper, three commentators explore its
implications.
Karen Schriver (7-11) examines how such usability testing developed and became an institutionalized part of document design in the decades following Atlas's suggestion. John R. Hayes (12-14) worries that misguided cost-cutting often causes manufacturing firms and school districts to skip "user edits" and end up with unproductive hardware and software. And Nina Wishbow (15-20) notes the practical, training value of the user edit in revealing crucial missing information and related flaws that are hard to detect by other means. Atlas responds to the commentators with his own (21-24) retrospective look at the discovery, explanation, and fate of user edits. | |||
| Reflecting on Atlas's User Edit: Changes in Thinking About Usability Between 1981 and 1998 | | BIBA | 7-11 | |
| Karen Schriver | |||
| In the first of three commentaries on Atlas, Schriver examines how such usability testing developed and became an institutionalized part of document design in the decades following Atlas's suggestion. | |||
| Atlas's 'The User Edit': The Impact on Product Assessment | | BIBA | 12-14 | |
| John R. Hayes | |||
| In the second of three commentaries on Atlas, Hayes worries that misguided cost-cutting often causes manufacturing firms and school districts to skip "user edits" and end up with unproductive hardware and software. | |||
| Still Looking for Trouble: Commentary on Marshall Atlas's 'The User Edit' | | BIBA | 15-20 | |
| Nina Wishbow | |||
| In the third of three commentaries on Atlas, Wishbow notes the practical, training value of the user edit in revealing crucial missing information and related flaws that are hard to detect by other means. | |||
| The User Edit Revisited, or If We're So Smart, Why Ain't We Rich? | | BIBA | 21-24 | |
| Marshall Atlas | |||
| Atlas responds to the three commentators on his original paper with his own retrospective look at the discovery, explanation, and fate of user edits. | |||
| Linda Flower and Social Cognition: Constructing a View of the Writing Process | | BIBA | 25-37 | |
| Beverly B. Zimmerman | |||
| Linda Flower has published abundantly about what (student) writers do and think as they write. Beverly Zimmerman's awareness essay analytically and systematically surveys this literature. Her goal is to trace how Flower's original problem-solving treatment evolved into a "social cognitive model" as Flower sought to balance the personal and conceptual aspects of writing with the increasingly popular view that writing is a social process shaped by external, cultural forces. Conclusion: "...neither social nor cognitive [writing] theory makes genuine sense without the other." | |||
| Table of Contents Service for (the other) Journal of Documentation | | BIB | 38-63 | |
| T. R. Girill | |||
| SIGDOC98 Program, Travel, and Registration News | | BIBA | 64-70 | |
| Phyllis Galt | |||
| Program summary and registration details for the annual conference. | |||
| Designing Information-Supported Performance: The Scope for Graphics | | BIBA | 3-10 | |
| Patricia Wright | |||
| Using three psychological studies of the role of graphics in three different
documentation projects to illustrate her points, Wright argues against the
popular cliche of seeking a standard "best practice" to solve documentation
problems. She suggests as more beneficial the thoughtful balancing of design
tradeoffs by carefully exploiting the boundary conditions specific to each
project, using a "map" of past research for guidance.
Immediately following Wright's paper, four commentators explore its implications. Russell Borland (11-15) looks closely at just how research "maps" of various structures and granularities might actually support managing design tradeoffs. Thomas Williams and Judith Ramey (16-20) consider the difficulty of thoroughly representing the documentation "knowledge matrix" in a way that both researchers and practitioners will find helpful. And Thyra Rauch (21-25) argues that long-term social studies of users and their task domains may be sufficient to guide documentation tradeoffs in practice. | |||
| Pushing Us Into the Map | | BIBA | 11-15 | |
| Russell Borland | |||
| In the first of three commentaries on Wright, Russell Borland (11-15) looks closely at just how research "maps" of various structures and granularities might actually support managing design tradeoffs. | |||
| Commentary on Wright | | BIBA | 16-20 | |
| Thomas Williams; Judith Ramey | |||
| In the second of three commentaries on Wright, Thomas Williams and Judith Ramey (16-20) consider the difficulty of thoroughly representing the documentation "knowledge matrix" in a way that both researchers and practitioners will find helpful. | |||
| Designing Information for Users | | BIBA | 21-25 | |
| Thyra Rauch | |||
| In the third of three commentaries on Wright, Thyra Rauch (21-25) argues that long-term social studies of users and their task domains may be sufficient to guide documentation tradeoffs in practice. | |||
| Unveiling the Extraordinary Possibilities and Implicit Threats of Online Communication | | BIBA | 27-31 | |
| Lauren Jamieson | |||
| In the first of three coordinated analytical commentaries on Laura Gurak's Persuasion and Privacy in Cyberspace (Yale, 1997), Jamieson summarizes the book's treatment of two protest movements that were conducted almost entirely by electronic mail (concerning the Lotus MarketPlace consumer database and, separately, the Clipper chip approach to encryption policy). | |||
| Audience Analysis in Cyberspace: Defining the Invisible | | BIBA | 32-36 | |
| Lisa Rosenberger | |||
| In this second of three related book commentaries on Gurak's Persuasion and Privacy, Rosenberger shows the relevance to online discussion of a traditional rhetorical tool when she argues that "while Gurak never uses the phrase 'audience analysis', her entire book hinges on the concept." | |||
| Is 'Online Community' an Oxymoron or a New Reality? | | BIBA | 37-44 | |
| Heidi Huse | |||
| In this third of three related book commentaries, Huse compares the two "online communities" of protesters that formed during the two cases treated in Gurak's Persuasion and Privacy. She finds (with Gurak) that their ethos and their delivery patterns actually just reflect, or "perhaps even intensify," traditional biases and gender patterns familiar in offline discussion. concept." | |||
| Knowledge Production from Different Worlds: What Can Happen When Technical Writers Speak for Engineers | | BIBA | 45-53 | |
| Bernadette Longo | |||
| Longo traces the historical path of technical writing since 1900 in the United States to show that while before World War II most technical writers were engineers explaining their own work, after World War II they became mostly humanities-trained communication specialists explaining the work of others. Recently, some engineering schools and writing programs have sought to reclaim this "knowledge making" role for engineers themselves, and Longo closes by offering her assessment of this rhetorical trend. | |||
| Call for Papers for ACM SIGDOC 1999 | | BIBA | 54-56 | |
| Stuart Selber | |||
| How to contribute to the program of the SIGDOC 1999 annual conference. | |||