Douglas Zytko
Leanne DeVreugd
Skip Abstract Section
Abstract
This paper reports on efforts to design a social matching system that instigates collaborative research across multiple fields of practice, in this instance: researchers from academia and organizations in their local geographic community. A qualitative study is presented about university researchers and the design of their profile pages for the system. Findings show that university researchers prefer profile page designs that enable them to demonstrate a willingness to adapt to non-academic partners, such as by de-emphasizing esoteric markers of expertise like scholarly publications and clarifying their resources and goals. Some also wish to circumvent potential bias by omitting information about their name, physical appearance, and academic department. However, these desired omissions raise questions about how to design for sufficient distinction between profile pages and the presentation of a unique professional identity. Implications are discussed for the design of social marching systems for collaboration.
- Howard S Becker. 2010. Writing for social scientists: How to start and finish your thesis, book, or article. ReadHowYouWant, LLC.Google Scholar
- Rena Bivens and Anna Shah Hoque. 2018. Programming sex, gender, and sexuality: Infrastructural failures in the" feminist" dating app Bumble. Can. J. Commun. 43, 3 (2018), 441--459.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Toke Bjerregaard. 2010. Industry and academia in convergence: Micro-institutional dimensions of R&D collaboration. Technovation 30, 2 (2010), 100--108.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Pierre Bourdieu. 1990. The logic of practice. Stanford university press.Google Scholar
- Danah Michele Boyd. 2008. Taken out of context: American teen sociality in networked publics. University of California, Berkeley.Google Scholar
- Dennis P. Bozeman and K. Michele Kacmar. 1997. A cybernetic model of impression management processes in organizations. Organ. Behav. Hum. Decis. Process. 69, 1 (1997), 9--30. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1006/obhd.1996.2669Google ScholarCross Ref
- Dennis P Bozeman and K Michele Kacmar. 1997. A cybernetic model of impression management processes in organizations. Organ. Behav. Hum. Decis. Process. 69, 1 (1997), 9--30.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Vannevar Bush and others. 1945. As we may think. Atl. Mon. 176, 1 (1945), 101--108.Google Scholar
- John T Cacioppo, Stephanie Cacioppo, Gian C Gonzaga, Elizabeth L Ogburn, and Tyler J Vanderweele. 2013. Marital satisfaction and break-ups differ across on-line and off-line meeting venues. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. 110, 25 (2013), 10135--10140. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1222447110Google ScholarCross Ref
- Michel De Certeau. 1984. The practice of everyday life, trans. University of California Press.Google Scholar
- B Jack Copeland. 2004. The Essential Turing. Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
- B Jack Copeland. 2010. Colossus: The secrets of Bletchley Park's code-breaking computers. OUP Oxford.Google Scholar
- Laurie E Damianos, Donna L Cuomo, and Stan Drozdetski. 2011. Handshake: a case study for exploring business networking for the enterprise, inside and out. In International Conference on Online Communities and Social Computing, 162--171.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Mary Deane and Peter O'Neill. 2011. Writing in the Disciplines. Macmillan International Higher Education.Google Scholar
- Nicole Ellison, Rebecca Heino, and J. L. Gibbs. 2006. Managing impressions online: self-presentation processes in the online dating environment. J. Comput. Commun. 11, (2006), 415--441. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1083--6101.2006.00020.xGoogle Scholar
- Douglas C Engelbart and William K English. 1968. A research center for augmenting human intellect. In Proceedings of the Fall Joint Computer Conference (San Francisco, Calif., Dec. 9--11), 395--410.Google ScholarDigital Library
- Norman Fairclough. 1992. Discourse and text: Linguistic and intertextual analysis within discourse analysis. Discourse Soc. 3, 2 (1992), 193--217.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Andrew T Fiore and Judith S Donath. 2004. Online Personals: An Overview. In CHI'04 Extended Abstracts on Human Factors in ?, 1395--1398. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1145/985921.986073Google ScholarDigital Library
- Jeaninne Horowitz Gassol. 2007. The effect of university culture and stakeholders' perceptions on university--business linking activities. J. Technol. Transf. 32, 5 (2007), 489--507.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Erving Goffman. 1978. The Presentation of Self in Everyday Life. New York, NY: Harmondsworth.Google Scholar
- Ido Guy, Inbal Ronen, and Eric Wilcox. 2009. Do you know?: recommending people to invite into your social network. In Proceedings of the 14th international conference on Intelligent user interfaces, 77--86.Google Scholar
- Ido Guy, Sigalit Ur, Inbal Ronen, Adam Perer, and Michal Jacovi. 2011. Do you want to know?: recommending strangers in the enterprise. In Proceedings of the ACM 2011 conference on Computer supported cooperative work, 285--294.Google ScholarDigital Library
- Barbara Kamler and Pat Thomson. 2014. Helping doctoral students write: Pedagogies for supervision. Routledge.Google Scholar
- Henry Kautz, Bart Selman, and Mehul Shah. 1997. ReferralWeb: Combining social networks and collaborative filtering. Commun. ACM 40, 3 (1997), 63--66.Google ScholarDigital Library
- Ralph Kimball and B Verplank E Harslem. 1982. Designing the Star user interface. Byte 7, 1982 (1982), 242--282.Google Scholar
- Jean Lave and Etienne Wenger. 1991. Situated learning: Legitimate peripheral participation. Cambridge university press.Google Scholar
- Barry M Leiner, Vinton G Cerf, David D Clark, Robert E Kahn, Leonard Kleinrock, Daniel C Lynch, Jon Postel, Larry G Roberts, and Stephen Wolff. 2009. A brief history of the Internet. ACM SIGCOMM Comput. Commun. Rev. 39, 5 (2009), 22--31.Google ScholarDigital Library
- Henry Lieberman. 2008. A Creative Programming Environment. In HCI Remixed. Mit Press, 37--42.Google Scholar
- Ching-Yung Lin, Kate Ehrlich, Vicky Griffiths-Fisher, and Christopher Desforges. 2008. Smallblue: People mining for expertise search. IEEE Multimed. 15, 1 (2008), 78--84.Google ScholarDigital Library
- Christopher M Mascaro, Rachel M Magee, and Sean P Goggins. 2012. Not just a wink and smile: an analysis of user-defined success in online dating. In Proceedings of the 2012 iConference, 200--206.Google ScholarDigital Library
- Julia M Mayer, Starr Roxanne Hiltz, and Quentin Jones. 2015. Making social matching context-aware: Design concepts and open challenges. In Proceedings of the 33rd Annual ACM Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, 545--554.Google ScholarDigital Library
- David W McDonald and Mark S Ackerman. 2000. Expertise recommender: a flexible recommendation system and architecture. In Proceedings of the 2000 ACM conference on Computer supported cooperative work, 231--240.Google ScholarDigital Library
- Brad A Myers. 1998. A brief history of human computer interaction technology. interactions 5, 2 (1998), 44--54.Google Scholar
- Tim Reichling and Volker Wulf. 2009. Expert recommender systems in practice: evaluating semi-automatic profile generation. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, 59--68.Google ScholarDigital Library
- Andrew L Russell and Valerie Schafer. 2014. In the Shadow of ARPANET and Internet: Louis Pouzin and the Cyclades Network in the 1970s. Technol. Cult. 55, 4 (2014), 880--907.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Rosemary Simpson, Allen Renear, Elli Mylonas, and Andries van Dam. 1996. 50 years after "As we may think": the Brown/MIT Vannevar Bush symposium. interactions 3, 2 (1996), 47--67.Google Scholar
- Anselm Strauss and Juliet M Corbin. 1990. Basics of Qualitative Research: Grounded Theory Procedures and Techniques. Sage Publications, Inc.Google Scholar
- Loren Terveen and David W McDonald. 2005. Social matching: A framework and research agenda. ACM Trans. Comput. Interact. 12, 3 (2005), 401--434.Google ScholarDigital Library
- Clark Thompson. 1986. Military direction of academic CS research. Commun. ACM 29, 7 (1986), 583--585.Google ScholarDigital Library
- Dylan Tweney. 2008. Dec. 9, 1968: The mother of all Demos. Wired News 12, 08 (2008).Google Scholar
- David Vise. 2007. The google story. Strateg. Dir. 23, 10 (2007).Google Scholar
- Jessica Vitak, Cliff Lampe, Rebecca Gray, and Nicole B Ellison. 2012. Why won't you be my Facebook friend?: Strategies for managing context collapse in the workplace. In Proceedings of the 2012 iConference, 555--557.Google ScholarDigital Library
- Etienne Wenger. 1999. Communities of practice: Learning, meaning, and identity. Cambridge university press.Google Scholar
- Doug Zytko, Sukeshini A. Grandhi, and Quentin Jones. 2016. The coaches said...what?: Analysis of online dating strategies recommended by dating coaches. In Proceedings of the International ACM SIGGROUP Conference on Supporting Group Work. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1145/2957276.2957287Google ScholarDigital Library
- Douglas Zytko, Sukeshini A. Grandhi, and Quentin Jones. 2014. Impression management struggles in online dating. In Proceedings of the International ACM SIGGROUP Conference on Supporting Group Work. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1145/2660398.2660410Google ScholarDigital Library
Index Terms
- Designing a Social Matching System to Connect Academic Researchers with Local Community Collaborators
Recommendations
Social Matching Systems for Research Collaboration: A Profile Page Design for University Faculty
CSCW '19 Companion: Companion Publication of the 2019 Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work and Social ComputingSocial matching systems, while popular for dating and platonic connections, can also play a role in the workplace, particularly for initiating collaborations between professionals from traditionally disparate fields of practice. In this paper we present ...
Identity and publication in non-university settings: academic co-authorship and collaboration
Increased collaboration between researchers working in university, industry, and governmental settings is changing the landscape of academic science. Traditional models of the interaction between these sectors, such as the triple helix concept, draw ...
What is the optimal number of researchers for social science research?
Many studies have found that co-authored research is more highly cited than single author research. This finding is policy relevant as it indicates that encouraging co-authored research will tend to maximise citation impact. Nevertheless, whilst the ...
Comments