Advertisement

Social: Theories and Models

  • Frank E. Ritter
  • Gordon D. Baxter
  • Elizabeth F. Churchill
Chapter

Abstract

In the previous chapter we introduced concepts related to teams and teamwork. This chapter provides concepts for analyzing, interpreting, and modeling how teams work. We turn to models of social communication and coordination that have gained prominence as we think about people in technical and social networks and at higher levels of organization. This chapter introduces some of the many concepts, theories, and results related to social processes that can influence system design, and also notes how to model social processes for use as theories and for applications.

Keywords

Social Process Work Context Structural Hole Soft System Methodology Knowledge Management System 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

References

  1. Axelrod, R. (1984). The evolution of cooperation. New York, NY: Basic Books.Google Scholar
  2. Baxter, G. D., Monk, A. F., Tan, K., Dear, P. R. F., & Newell, S. J. (2005). Using cognitive task analysis to facilitate the integration of decision support systems into the neonatal intensive care unit. Artificial Intelligence in Medicine, 35, 243–257.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Baecker, R. M. (Ed.). (1993). Readings in groupware and computer-supported cooperative work: Assisting humanhuman collaboration. San Mateo, CA: Morgan Kaufmann.Google Scholar
  4. Beyer, H., & Holtzblatt, K. (1999). Contextual design. interactions, 6(1), 32–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Blackmon, M. H., Polson, P. G., Kitajima, M., & Lewis, C. (2002). Cognitive walk through for the Web. In Proceedings of CHI’02 Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, 463-470. ACM: New York, NY.Google Scholar
  6. Boehm, B., & Hansen, W. (2001). The spiral model as a tool for evolutionary acquisition. Crosstalk: The Journal of Defense Software Engineering, 14(5), 4–11.Google Scholar
  7. Brennan, S. E. (1998). The grounding problem in conversations with and through computers. In S. R. Fussell & R. J. Kreuz (Eds.), Social and cognitive psychological approaches to interpersonal communication (pp. 201–225). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  8. Brown, B., Green, N., & Harper, R. (2001). Wireless world: Social and interactional aspects of wireless technology. London, UK: Springer-Verlag.Google Scholar
  9. Burt, R. S. (2004). Structural holes and good ideas. American Journal of Sociology, 110(2), 349–399.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Carley, K. M. (1996). A comparison of artificial and human organizations. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, 31, 175–191.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Carroll, J. M., Rosson, M. B., Convertino, G., & Ganoe, C. H. (2006). Awareness and teamwork in computer-supported collaborations. Interacting with Computers, 18(1), 21–46.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Casey, S. M. (1998). Set phasers on stun: And other true tales of design, technology, and human error. Santa Barbara, CA: Aegean.Google Scholar
  13. Castilla, E. J., Hwang, H., Granovetter, E., & Granovetter, M. (2000). Social networks in Silicon Valley. In C.-M. Lee, W. F. Miller, M. G. Hancock & H. S. Rowen (Eds.), The Silicon Valley edge (pp. 218–247). Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
  14. Checkland, P. (1981). Systems thinking, systems practice. Chichester, UK: Wiley.Google Scholar
  15. Checkland, P., & Scholes, J. (1999). Soft systems in action (2nd ed.). Chichester, UK: Wiley.Google Scholar
  16. Checkland, P., & Poulter, J. (2006). Learning for action: A short definitive account of soft systems methodology and its use for practitioners, teachers and students. Chichester, UK: Wiley.Google Scholar
  17. Cheyne, T., & Ritter, F. E. (2001). Targeting respondents on the Internet successfully and responsibly. Communications of the ACM, 44(4), 94–98.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Churchill, E. F. (2010). The (Anti) Social Net. interactions, 17(5), 22–25.Google Scholar
  19. Churchill, E. F., & Bly, S. (1999). Virtual environments at work: Ongoing use of MUDs in the workplace. In Proceedings of the International Joint Conference on Work Activities Coordination and Collaboration, 99–108. ACM: New York, NY.Google Scholar
  20. Churchill, E. F., Snowdon, D., & Munro, A. (Eds.). (2001). Collaborative virtual environments. Digital places and spaces for interaction. London, UK: Springer Verlag.Google Scholar
  21. Clark, H. H., & Brennan, S. E. (1991a). Grounding in communication. In L. B. Resnick, J. M. Levine, & S. D. Teasley (Eds.), Perspectives on socially shared cognition (pp. 127–149). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Clark, H. H., & Brennan, S. E. (1991b). Perspectives on socially shared cognition. In L. B. Resnick & J. M. Levine (Eds.), Washington. DC: American Psychological Association.Google Scholar
  23. Coleman, J. R. (1974). Blue-Collar journal: A college president’s sabbatical. Philadelphia, PA: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins.Google Scholar
  24. Committee on Organizational Modeling from Individuals to Societies, & G. L. Zacharias, J. MacMillan, and Susan B. Van Hemel (Eds). (2007). Behavioral modeling and simulation: From individuals to societies. Washington, DC: National Academies Press. http://www.nap.edu/catalog/12169.html.
  25. Crabtree, A. (2003). Designing collaborative systems: A practical guide to ethnography. London, UK: Springer.Google Scholar
  26. Desanctis, G., & Monge, P. (1998). Communication processes for virtual organizations. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 3(4), [online file].Google Scholar
  27. Dodds, P. S., Muhamad, R., & Watts, D. J. (2003). An experimental study of search in global social networks. Science, 301(5634), 827–829.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Dunbar, R. I. M. (1992). Neocortex size as a constraint on group size in primates. Journal of Human Evolution, 22(6), 469–493.CrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  29. El Helou, S., Tzagarakis, M., Gillet, D., Karacapilidis, N., & Yu Man, C. (2008). Participatory design for awareness features: Enhancing interaction in communities of practice. In Proceedings of the 6th International Conference on Networked Learning, 523–530. Networked Learning Conference Office, Lancaster University: Lancaster, LANCS.Google Scholar
  30. Fan, X., & Yen, J. (2004). Modeling and simulating human teamwork behaviors using intelligent agents. Physics of Life Reviews, 1(3), 173–201.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Gibson, W. (1988). Mona Lisa overdrive. New York, NY: Bantam Books.Google Scholar
  32. Goolsby, R. (2005). Ethics and defense agency funding: Some considerations. Social Networks, 27, 95–106.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Gottman, J. M., Murray, J. D., Swanson, C., Tyson, R., & Swanson, K. R. (2005). The mathematics of marriage: Dynamic nonlinear models. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  34. Halloran, M. E., Ferguson, N. M., Eubank, S., Longini, I. M. J., Cummings, D. A., Lewis, B., et al. (2008). Modeling targeted layered containment of an influenza pandemic in the United States. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 105(12), 4639–4644.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Jones, R. M., Laird, J. E., Nielsen, P. E., Coulter, K. J., Kenny, P., & Koss, F. V. (1999). Automated intelligent pilots for combat flight simulation. AI Magazine, 20(1), 27–41.Google Scholar
  36. Kang, J. (2000). Cyber-race. Harvard Law Review, 113, 1130–1208.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Kozlowski, S. W. J., & Ilgen, D. R. (2006). Enhancing the effectiveness of work groups and teams. Psychological Science in the Public Interest, 7(3), 77–124.Google Scholar
  38. Landauer, T. K. (1995). The trouble with computers: Usefulness, usability and productivity. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  39. Levchuk, G. M., Levchuk, Y. N., Luo, J., Pattipati, K. R., & Kleinman, D. L. (2002). Normative design of organizations—Part I: Mission planning. IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and CyberneticsPart A: Systems and Humans, 32(3), 346–359.Google Scholar
  40. Levitt, S., & Dubner, S. J. (2005). Freakonomics: A rogue economist explores the hidden side of everything New York. NY: William Morrow/HarperCollins.Google Scholar
  41. Lewis, C., & Reiman, J. (1998). Task-centered user interface design. hcibib.org/tcuid/.Google Scholar
  42. Milgram, S. (1967). The Small-World Problem. Psychology Today, 1, 61–67.Google Scholar
  43. Millen, D. R., Feinberg, J., & Kerr, B. (2006). Dogear: Social bookmarking in the enterprise. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, 111–120. ACM: New York, NY.Google Scholar
  44. Monk, A., & Howard, S. (1998). The rich picture: A tool for reasoning about work context. interactions [sic], 5(2), 21–30.Google Scholar
  45. Monk, A. F. (1998). Lightweight techniques to encourage innovative user interface design. In L. Wood (Ed.), User interface design: Bridging the gap between user requirements and design (pp. 109–129). Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press.Google Scholar
  46. Nielsen, J. (1993). Usability engineering. Chestnut Hill, MA: AP Professional Press.MATHGoogle Scholar
  47. Nonaka, I., & Takeuchi, H. (1995). The knowledge creating company: How Japanese companies create the dynamics of innovation. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  48. Olson, J. S., & Olson, G. M. (2003–2004). Culture surprises in remote software development teams. ACM. Queue, 1(9), 52–59.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Pew, R. W., & Mavor, A. S. (Eds.). (2007). Human-system integration in the system development process: A new look. Washington, DC: National Academies Press. http://books.nap.edu/catalog.php?record_id=11893. Accessed 10 March 2014.
  50. Plowman, L., Rogers, Y., & Ramage, M. (1995). What are workplace studies for? In Proceedings of the Fourth European Conference on Computer-Supported Cooperative Work ECSCW’95, 309–324. Kluwer: Dordrecht, The Netherlands.Google Scholar
  51. Rainie, H., Rainie, L., & Wellman, B. (2012). Networked. The new social operating system. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  52. Ruhleder, K., & Jordan, B. (1999). Meaning-making across remote sites: How delays in transmission affect interaction. In Proceedings of the Sixth European Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work (ECSCW’99), 411–429. Kluwer: Norwell, MA.Google Scholar
  53. Rutkowski, A. F., Vogel, D. R., Van Genuchten, M., Bemelmans, T. M., & Favier, M. (2002). E-collaboration: The reality of virtuality. IEEE Transactions on Professional Communication, 45(4), 219–230.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Sacks, H. (1992). Lectures on Conversation, Volumes I and II. Edited by G. Jefferson with Introduction by E.A. Schegloff. Oxford, UK: Blackwell.Google Scholar
  55. Simon, H. A. (1997). Administrative behavior (4th ed.). New York, NY: The Free Press.Google Scholar
  56. Snowdon, D., Churchill, E. F., & Frecon, E. (Eds.). (2003). Inhabited information spaces: Living with your data. London, UK: Springer Verlag.Google Scholar
  57. Suchman, L. (1983). Office procedures as practical action: Models of work and system design. ACM Transactions on Office Information Systems, 1(4), 320–328.Google Scholar
  58. Tambe, M., Johnson, W. L., Jones, R. M., Koss, F., Laird, J. E., Rosenbloom, P. S., et al. (1995). Intelligent agents for interactive simulation environments. AI Magazine, 16(1), 15–40.Google Scholar
  59. ten Have, P. (1999). Doing conversation analysis. London: Sage Publications.Google Scholar
  60. Travers, J., & Milgram, S. (1969). An experimental study of the small world problem. Sociometry, 32(4), 425–443.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Tuckman, B. W. (1965). Developmental sequence in small groups. Psychological Bulletin, 63, 384–399.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Viller, S., & Sommerville, I. (2000). Ethnographically informed analysis for software engineers. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 53(1), 169–196.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Vinge, V. (2006). Rainbows End. New York, NY: Tor Books.Google Scholar
  64. Watts, D. (2003). Six degrees: The science of a connected age. New York, NY: W. W. Norton.Google Scholar
  65. Wenger, E. (1998). Communities of Practice: Learning, meaning, and identity. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. Zachary, W., Santarelli, T., Lyons, D., Bergondy, M., & Johnston, J. (2001). Using a community of intelligent synthetic entities to support operational team training. In Proceedings of the Tenth Conference on Computer Generated Forces and Behavioral Representation, 215–224. Institute for Simulation and Training, University of Central Florida: Orlando, FL.Google Scholar
  67. Zhao, D., & Rosson, M. B. (2009). How and why people Twitter: The role that micro-blogging plays in informal communication at work. In Proceedings of the ACM 2009 International Conference on Supporting Group Work, 243–252. ACM: New York, NY.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag London 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  • Frank E. Ritter
    • 1
  • Gordon D. Baxter
    • 2
  • Elizabeth F. Churchill
    • 3
  1. 1.College of ISTThe Pennsylvania State UniversityUniversity ParkUSA
  2. 2.School of Computer ScienceUniversity of St AndrewsSt AndrewsUK
  3. 3.eBay Research LabsSan JoseUSA

Personalised recommendations