Advertisement

Expected Information Needs of Parents for Pervasive Awareness Systems

  • Vassilis-Javed Khan
  • Panos Markopoulos
  • Boris de Ruyter
  • Wijnand IJsselsteijn
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 4794)

Abstract

This paper examines the communication needs of busy parents that can be served by awareness systems: systems supporting a continuous and semi-automated flow of information about the activities of communicating individuals. We report an online survey involving 69 participants. This survey focused on whether the types of information offered by awareness systems as these are introduced in current research literature are appreciated by busy parents. The results show a) that information items that allow personalization and expressing intentionality are more desired than those than low granularity and automatically sensed information that is easy to collect automatically b) the attitudes regarding the information that people wish to share about themselves is almost identical to what they wish to know of their partners and c) survey methods focusing on information do not need to differentiate between the direction of information flow or whether this is symmetric, since people report almost identical preferences.

Keywords

Awareness systems Communication needs Pervasive computing 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Brave, S., Dahley, A.: inTouch: A Medium for Haptic Interpersonal Communication. In: CHI 1997, pp. 363–364 (1997)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Cadiz, J.J., Venolia, G., Jancke, G., Gupta, A.: Designing and deploying an information awareness interface. In: CSCW (2002)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Erickson, T., Kellogg, W.A.: Social translucence: an approach to designing systems that support social processes. ACM TOCHI 7(1), 59–83 (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Hong, J.I., Landay, J.A.: An Architecture for Privacy- Sensitive Ubiquitous Computing. In: Mobisys 2004, Boston, MA, pp. 177–189 (2004)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Jiang, X., Hong, J., Landay, J.: Approximate Information Flows: Socially-Based Modeling of Privacy in Ubiquitous computing. In: Borriello, G., Holmquist, L.E. (eds.) UbiComp 2002. LNCS, vol. 2498, pp. 176–193. Springer, Heidelberg (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Jones, D.M., Bench-Capon, T.J.M., Visser, P.R.S.: Methodologies for ontology development. In: Proc. ITi and KNOWS Conference of the 15th IFIP World Computer Congress, pp. 62–75. Chapman- Hall, Sydney, Australia (1998)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Kapadia, R., Andersson, G.: Statistics explained. In: Making Inferences. ch. 11, p. 200. Ellis Horwood Limited (1987)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Khan, V.J., Markopoulos, P., Mota, S., IJsselsteijn, W., de Ruyter, B.: Intra-family communication needs; how can Awareness Systems provide support? In: Proc. Intelligent Environments (2006)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Kubey, R., Larson, R., Csikszentmihalyi, M.: Experience sampling method. Applications to communication research questions. Journal of Communication 46(2), 99–120 (1996)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Markopoulos, P., Romero, N., van Baren, J., IJsselsteijn, W., de Ruyter, B., Farshchian, B.: Keeping in Touch with the Family: Home and Away with the ASTRA Awareness System. In: CHI 2004 (2004)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Oulasvirta, A., Raento, M., Tiitta, S.: ContextContacts: re-designing SmartPhone’s contact book to support mobile awareness and collaboration. In: MobileHCI 2005, vol. 111, pp. 167–174. ACM Press, New York (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Rowan, J., Mynatt, E.D.: Digital family portrait field trial: Support for aging in place. In: CHI 2005, pp. 521–530 (2005)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Strong, R., Gaver, B.: Feather, Scent and Shaker: Supporting Simple Intimacy. In: CSCW 1996, ACM Press, New York (1996)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Sugumaran, V., Storey, V.C.: Ontologies for conceptual modeling: their creation, use, and management. Data & Knowledge Engineering 42(3), 251–271 (2002)zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Tollmar, K., Joakim, P.: Understanding Remote Presence. In: Proc. NordiCHI (2002)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Vetere, F., Gibbs, M., Kjeldskov, J., Howard, S., Floyd Mueller, F., Pedell, S., Mecoles, K., Bunyan, M.: Mediating intimacy: designing technologies to support strong-tie relationships. In: CHI 2005 (2005)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2007

Authors and Affiliations

  • Vassilis-Javed Khan
    • 1
  • Panos Markopoulos
    • 1
  • Boris de Ruyter
    • 2
  • Wijnand IJsselsteijn
    • 1
  1. 1.Eindhoven University of Technology, Den Dolech 2, 5600MB, EindhovenThe Netherlands
  2. 2.Philips Research, Media Interaction, Prof. Holstlaan 4, 5656AA, EindhovenThe Netherlands

Personalised recommendations