Thursday, March 31, 2011

Paper Reading #18: An Adaptive Calendar Assistant Using Pattern Mining for User Preference Modelling

Comment 1: http://chiblog.sjmorrow.com/2011/03/paper-reading-18-adaptive-calendar.html
Comment 2: http://csce436-nabors.blogspot.com/2011/03/reading-18-adaptive-calendar-assistant.html

An Adaptive Calendar Assistant Using Pattern Mining for User Preference Modelling
Alfred Krzywicki, Wayne Wobcke and Anna Wong
Intelligent User Interfaces

This paper is about a new user interface for calendars that allows users to not only see their events but also helps intelligently organize them. The calendar application has a few features that other calendars do not, one being, suggestion of attributes for appointments such as date and time as well as location and other factors. This can help the user to have a more detailed glance view when they mouse over an event or look at a short version when clicking on it. It also has a feature named SmartCal that tracks patterns in user appointments and better helps to give suggestions on how to organize events and when an upcoming event might happen. The algorithm is both intelligent and minimally invasive and allows the user to ignore suggestions as well as change them over time. The design also helps to point out conflicting and overlapping conflicts and allows the user to either device a solution of their own or gives suggestions of how it could be handled. The authors even give the basic code and talk a lot more about the design of SmartCal and how it generates solutions to various problems that the user encounters while using the application. They perofrmed an experiment of users trying the application over a four week period and then collected results of how often the user used the new features and how many times they listened to the suggestions made as well as the frequency they used them to resolve conflicts. Users seemed relatively happy and commonly used the suggestions but not to the extent that the authors thought they might. They did get to see their appointment suggestion feature in action which had results ranging from 55% accuracy to 100% accuracy based on the user. The tests seemed to be rather successful and they want to improve the robustness and accuracy of their algorithm in the future.



I think this application looks really cool and the idea of the algorith that can predict when my appointments is going to be is really cool. However I am starting to notice a pattern of the various article I am reading and I am getting a lot of these kinds of applications recently. It seems like a lot of my articles are "applications that are built to serve a very particular set of people" and for the most part are things I don't REALLY see myself using. This makes it hard for me to really say anything overly helpful about the application, despite this there is some things that I will say about SmartCal. First, I do like the suggestion algorithm and think it is a good idea. If I was able to generate solutions to my various calendar problems and overlaps and have them pointed out to me before they become a problem. I didn't like that it will generate suggestions on how to make my events better or the strange organization system that the authors wanted where they have three kinds of events divided into categories. Again in all I think this is going to be a very good aplpication for people in the office place who have lots of appointments and need to make sense of them. I will not be in this stage for a while and I dont see me using this application any time soon so it makes it hard for me to judge it. I am curious to see what the authors do with it next and if they are able to improve the prediction algorithm at all.

Tuesday, March 29, 2011

Paper Reading # 17: Agent-Assisted Task Management that Reduces Email Overload

Agent-Assisted Task Management that Reduces Email Overload
Andrew Faulring, Brad Myers, Ken Mohnkern, Bradley Schmerl, Aaron Steinfeld, John Zimmerman, Asim Smailagic, Jeffery Hansen, and Daniel Siewiorek
School of Computer Science, Carnegie Mellon University

In this article the authors introduce their new system called RADAR. Essentially what it is, is a email scanning system that helps a user to organize emails in the event of email overload. When a user has fifty plus emails sometimes it can be very hard to get through them all in a reasonable time and keep them organized and their system aims to assist with that. Essentially what the system does is use scanning algorithms and searches to identify characteristics that are similar in emails and then provide them with a tag that helps organize them. This is a simple overlay for an email that adds tags and tasks to the users email and then compares them and puts them into groups. The problem with this is that the user is essentially required to read the email twice to be able to check to make sure that the email is in the correct folder and has the correct tag. This is assisted by the RADAR task-creating function that helps the user organize the task and choose the correct tag for the email. The system also has a task scheduleing algorithm that allows the user to create a plan to go through the emails and put them into the correct catagories.Users who tested this system saw its original work as being very successful and it did indeed help them get through the organization and reading of emails faster. The authors claim that the biggest task they have now is making sure that the email program is robust enough to handle real world tasks. The users did find the AI really helpful but they didn't really understand the task scheduler and were unable to make great use of it. The users found that sometimes the task suggestion algorithm made them take MORE time reading emails and some people just found it faster to do without it. The study was called a success and the authors closed by saying they just want to make the AI more robust.


This article for me was rather dry. It seems like a really good system but it seemed like something that was really excessive and in some cases I wouldn't actually find much use for it. In fact, a lot of times I am checking emails on my phone and not at my computer so even if I had this program I really question how much I would use it. It does seem like a really nice system if you are working and checking your email at work all the time and you constantly have fifty emails in your box unchecked but I think that is a very small subset of users. I think all the excess features that they added beyond the AI that "proofreads" the email and assigns a tag also seem very excessive. The idea of having an algorithm that suggests when to look at what email and gives you a schedule to read emails seems like something that I might get rather frustrated with for getting in the way and constantly providing input. Despite this I do think that this work was a big success and the authors did do a really good job with their functionality. I am very curious as to how they plan to improve the algorithm and wanted to know more about that. Also, if this is going to be marketed as a product I don't think I will be picking it up anytime soon.

Monday, March 28, 2011

Ethnography Results Week 7:

This week I was unable to attend another Dnd session but I still have more to talk about from previous times. I did talk with my roommates about some of this and they were able to help fill in the details.

I had touched a few times on the idea of performing a character action in Dnd and how this is handled. I would like to look into this more from both a players perspective and a DM's perspective.

A character action is based on one of two things: a list of predefined actions done by a character or a list of skills that character has. The basic actions are run, attack, move, speak, etc... while character skills are things like: listen, spot (find), jump, swim, reference knowledge, use rope etc...

During the playtime these actions are used in two ways. The most general way is that a character chooses to use a skill as a means of chaning the status of an interaction. This can be everything from asking someone questions and being able to interrogate them, to stealing something from their person, to being able to sense if the person is being truthful or not. There are different skills for all of these and the player rolls a d20 + their skill modifier (on the players character sheet) to determine the total skill and then the DM 'chooses' whether or not they passed. I say chooses because it is seemingly random whether the DM has a value in mind or if the value is simply made up at the time of the roll and based on the person doing it. When this is passed or failed it changes, or doesn't change, the game state.

The other way it is used is as a way to determine how a character would act as part of the story. For instance, the PC's are all in a cave and rocks fall, if they had been careful they might have been able to 'detect trap' and see if it was a setup, either way they all are able to make a 'reflex' save to see if they dodge it, or perhaps, one character may be able to use 'escape artist' or 'jump' to avoid it. Similar situations could be the DM will ask players for a 'listen' check to see if any of them notice that something bad happened and the players are left to decide on their own if they want to inform the party or not.

The most interesting thing about this is that the players are essentially 'instructed' to ignore what they know outside the game (ie: the DM just asked for a listen check so something is going to happen), and play their character as if its in game (so each person determines whether or not they heard something based on their roll). It is an abstraction the player needs to be able to make when playing and though tempting to ignore the rules and use this meta-information it is much more entertaining and adventurous if the player does not.

The interesting thing is the amount of rolling this can add to a situation and even more interesting how actions and skills can divert from the DM's plan greatly. Instead of killing the three guards on the corner the players can possibly 'intimidate' the guards and ignore the combat altogether.

It is really one of the most difficult to accept parts of the game and one of the most complicated to understand for one who has never experienced it. However understanding this and understanding why these rules are in place make the experience much more fun for everyone involved and a group that can greatly commit will find a much more exciting adventure in their game time.

Thursday, March 24, 2011

Paper Reading #16: Tag Expression: Tagging with Feeling

Comment 1: http://chiblog.sjmorrow.com/2011/03/paper-reading-16-ir-ring-authenticating.html
Comment 2: http://csce436-nabors.blogspot.com/2011/03/reading-15-enabling-beyond-surface.html

Tag Expression: Tagging with Feeling
Jesse Vig, Matthew Soukup, Shilad Sen, John Riedl


This paper was about a new form of tagging for online websites and reviews. Essentially the authors said that the old version of tagging was rather archaic and outdated and there is amny functional improvements that could be made to make this much easier to do and more interactive for the user. They also wanted to make it to where the users who partcipate would actually be able to express how they feel about it and not just put tags that refer to the content. What they found was that the current scheme allows users to tag about the item as whole but does not allow them to comment on particular aspects of the item or really tag about how it made them feel or how it was accepted by a group. In their new version they plan to make tag boxes that have a few different functions: first, they want to have a coloring scheme that allows the users to show that the tags are representing positive, negative, or neutral aspects of the item being tagged. Second, they want the users to be able to direct their tags at different aspects, for example, tagging "exciting" about the movie and "neutral" about the actors. Third, they want to tag box to be interactive so that the user can simply agree with another tag and simply drop the tag into their own tag box, thus making the item appear larger, or add their own unique tag. They performed these experiments over a period of six months and were able to generate nearly thirty two thousand tags about ninety seven different items. What they found was that people enjoyed using their system for its simplicity and were able to fully express things about each aspect as opposed to the item as a while and the rating system given made more sense than previous tagging. They also found that the users enjoyed being able to assocaite the feelings with each tag and were able to give the item an inherent rating based on the tags and the number of people who agree with them. They say that their next step is a generator algorithm that helps the user select what tag they want to add based on entering different words and then finding good associations or simply the users being given a list and they can systematically take out the ones that aren't headed in the correct direction of their feelings.


I thought this article was interesting for a few reasons, first off, I have seen these tag boxes on review sites and movie sites all over the net and never really knew what they meant. Second, I didn't think that there was any real way to read them, I thought it was just a random list of words or advertisements that might help lead you to the site. What I did like was  the idea that you would be able to associate each tag as positive, negative or neutral. I think that just putting a tag is kind of skewed because what one person finds funny another might not so that kind of tag might be misleading. However this is also one of the services that I find might not be something that I am comming back to over and over. I don't really bother with making posts on blogs about movies or even posting on sites talking about what I think the writers and director were trying to say, so this is likely something I would not participate in. I also wonder about the extensibility and after awhile if people would feel the same in that they would eventually stop contributing and that eventually the tags would be a select group of people who enjoy tagging all the time. I think one positive thing is that this might be useful for items like books and websites. If someone were able to look and see what kinds of things the website does and how people respond to them then that might be a major help in finding what you are looking for. I think the idea is really good and solid but it is likely not something I would participate in.

Wednesday, March 23, 2011

Book Reading #7: Why We Make Mistakes

Why We Make Mistakes
Joseph T. Hallinan
Random House Digital, Inc

Chapter 0: Introduction: Why do we Make Mistakes?

The short answer is, because there is all kinds of mistakes to make. In fact we have more different kinds of mistakes that one might think of, in fact there are a lot of different kinds of mistakes that people never really ever consider. People make them everyday and in some cases these simple mistakes could have huge consequences. Even something as simple as forgetting a password can be a rather dangerous mistake but the fact that the password is protected is some good so we need to learn to accept both. Probably the biggest factor we need to remember is that when we learn something we need to be in the same state that we were in when we learned it. They even refer to the famous e=MCHammered experiment where drunk people were taught facts and then asked to recall them and only could while intoxicated.


This chapter was good for an introductory chapter. It made me think and had a few really good examples. Probably the best thing it did was give a really good account of what kinds of things the book is going to cover and entice the reader to keep going. I linked the examples especially about how fast people forget their passwords and how we have to remember too many things sometimes. It makes me wonder if there is a good way to just have one number for your whole life and easier to remember. Maybe not but it still stands that despite us making mistakes we don't exactly live a world where it is easy to NOT make them, again about how there is too many different kinds.

Chapter 1: We Look but Don't Always See

This chapter we are introduced to the many different kinds of mistakes and how they occur. There is clearly a number of different mistakes someone can make and we are introduced to a few and given an example. The author even gives a famous case of some researchers who asked a group of student to identify a few characteristics of the penny and tracked to see how many of them could remember details about it. Interestingly enough most people couldn't even remember three facts about the penny. Further he talks about how medical lab workers and people who work x-ray security at the airport commonly miss things. It is really rather scary to think about this and if these are missed enough there is going to be a problem. Despite this we are coming up with more ways to avoid error and need to be careful and understand what kinds of errors are common for what we are trying to do.

I think I have made a mistake in this blog as I can no longer see the bar that represents where I am at in my typing. While this is most likely not my fault it is still a mistake that was made and there was literally nothing I could do to prevent it. I am sure there is a simple fix but for some of these ideas that are being expressed there is not really anything that can be done and that is the inherent problem. Maybe we will eventually start designing items with the idea of mistake-proof or idiot-proof in mind but human error is as we've learned 90% of all mistakes so that is a hard task to tackle. I hope that eventually people will learn from their mistakes but that too might be a waste of a wish.

Chapter 2: We all Search for Meaning

In this chapter we are shown how memory works and get a few examples of how people remember certain things but not others. In fact it is a phenomena they author talks about seeing how many people remember features of pennies and what they remember about peoples names and faces. There are even a few tips given as how to remember a face or a name better and how these have been used historically to help identify criminals and other forms of identification. The biggest thing covered is the idea of the TOT or tip of tongue slip where the person replaces one familiarity with another. The example given of crossing Albert Einstein and Joe Thiesman.

This chapter to me was surprising but altogether rather intuitive. It makes sense that any memory can only contain so many things and the remembering certain information is nothing more than techniques and tricks to remember things. I did enjoy the examples of how people cant recognize pennies and cross names of people with similar traits or occupations. The story about the lady and the criminal really kind of made me sad and I could have done without it. Despite this these observations and studies were rather interesting and I didn't hate this chapter.

Chapter 3: We Connect the Dots

In this chapter we find out about how people connect the dots in certain situations. In fact many times people only forget things because they are unable to make a connection to the even or fact they wish to remember. We all know that some mistakes are more memorable than others but we might not all know that there is situations where changing your mind might be the best thing for you. In fact more people would do better on tests if they would change their answers. We also get to learn about how color counts in advertising and how color can change someones perception of an event or time. I think the most interesting part of this chapter was that even just a photo can contribute to the victory or loss of a political pundit and people draw these connections based on the smallest things.

I liked this chapter a lot, the ways that people connect certain features with good and bad or serious and not serious are rather interesting. It was neat to see how the smallest thing could skew ones judgment and then adjust their viewpoint all together. The part that really freaked me out is that somehow men can 'sense' when a topless dancer is in the period of reproduction and subsequently give them more money. It as if they can sense the pheromones that women give off and want to make them their mate and support them more. I think that this chapter was really interesting and I wanted to find more examples of these kinds of dot connecting exercises.

Chapter 4: We Wear Rose Colored Glasses

In this chapter we are introduced to the idea that people only see what they want to see, and when they do they tend to see things that they want to see better. They talked a lot about how when someone does something wrong their view of what they did changes based on how they feel about the person and what side they want to take. They also showed experiments where people were able to pick a picture of themselves out of a group that was more beautiful than they actually are. This even is extended to picking people out of a lineup as they pick the person who looks like that might have been the closest because of the fit of the person or what they do. Essentially that we see things as if we are looking at flowers and we want what we see to fit the situation.

I have read about this phenomena before and I think it is rather interesting. I also think it is inherently obvious that yes of course people are going to see what they want to see more so than anything else. Essentially this is like the idea of quitting threshold, you can hide an elephant as long as you tell people to look for something that's not an elephant. Some people will look so hard that unless they have some kind of special fervor for elephants or an affinity to large gray creatures then they will not remember. I could branch this over and say that you could hide a dancing bear in the same way. This was a fun chapter none the less and the examples were great.

Chapter 5: We Can Walk and Chew Bubble Gum, but Not Much Else

In this chapter we look at the idea that people can multitask just not that well. It is essentially the idea that when people multitask they might be able to do it but the quality to which they can do each activity suffers. It is the idea that in order to do more than one thing we need to focus on both and trying to do both makes both suffer. They look at examples involved with texting and driving and even nearly scorn Microsoft for trying to make things to use in the car while driving. They even show examples of how age, gender, religion and experience can affect multi-tasking skills and how people differ in their abilities to do these.

I do agree with this chapter, people really cant multitask well and when they try to it just leads to poor results. I also am amazed of the number of things that are made for the car to make driving more interesting. To me driving isn't supposed to be inherently interesting it is just something that needs to happen. I also think it is a good idea to cut down on distractions in the car as while people may be bored they are paying more attention to the road and what is going on. Some people tell me that this can then lead to sleepyness but that is entirely a different blog post.

Chapters 6: We are in the Wrong Frame of Mind

In this chapter we find out about how people frame different items and what this causes to happen. When people look at things in a certain light and how they frame different settings. Essentially it is the idea that when people see things in a certain way they tend to be able to block out other information and this can cause them to make mistakes. The examples given were similar to framing issues discussed in earlier literature of the class and there was discussion of why people do them. One of the best examples are at the supermarket when they try to sell things in groups of 4 instead of 1 or they say there is a limit on the number of items you are allowed to buy at a certain time. Simply because people think about these ideas they tend to subconsciously do them.

I think one of my favorite examples of this is to tell people to say the word silk three times and then ask them what cows drink. It is because they get into the frame of mind of thinking about silk and then choose words that associate with them. I think it is rather inherently interesting that humans try to group things into parts rather than simply thinking of ideas as stand alone units. I believe that a lot of this has to do with how memory works and how people store thoughts but traditional psychology has only proven this to some extent.


Chapter 7: We Skim

In these chapters we find out about how people make a different kind of mistake simply by grazing over a section of information rather than actually paying attention to it. This is known as skimming and leads to many kinds of mistakes with people. Essentially people who dont entirely understand something simply glance over it and accept it for what it is. The best example is when a music student plays music as it is and the instructor finds a printed mistake in all of them. We also are able to see that when people do something more than once the first time they simply skim and usually the second time they remember it better. It is simply a process of memory conversion and paying attention.

I think this chapter was also interesting and really had more to do with listening and paying attention more so than skimming. I want to do experiments all the time and see if I can improve my memory simply by trying to do tricks and see if I could do better the first time I look at a set of information. Even as I sit here now I am having to refer back to the book because I skimmed this chapter more than anything. I normally do fine with picking it up but I still need to look at things in the morning to remind myself of what I read the night before. I simply just want to focus more but sometimes I just get distracted. Like I am while I am writing this. The point is the chapter does have really good examples but in general is was things I had read before.

Chapter 8: We Like Things Tidy


In this chapter we see examples of how people like things organized rather than disorganized. There is a tendency for people to be able to not see something very obvious when there is a level of chaos or distraction to something. We tend to lump things together into categories to try to remember what they are and when we go back later to try to make sense of it we only retain the information if the information was organized in a logical way. We tend to want to try to keep the world in order and some experiments are shown of people wanting to organize items into groups and the processes they use to try and do this.

This chapter didn't make a whole lot of sense to me. It seemed rather slow and the examples didn't seem to make much sense as to what they were trying to study. I know there is a propensity of people to try and clean things or make them in a viewable manner but I don't see how running experiments is going to try and quantify that data or make it into a form that is presentable in a way that people don't already know. The chapter had good information just seemed a little, ironically, muddled.

Chapter 9: Men Shoot First


This chapter talks about how men are more trigger happy than women at taking a chance and more willing to shoot first. They even talk about why the military was originally all male because men have more of a propensity to shoot now and ask later. They even frame this in the context of making decisions where men are more likely to go with their gut and make a decision. Women tend to look at the big picture and will generally not take an opportunity when one presents itself. It was not a commentary on which was better just an observation on the fact that men will jump at an opportunity much faster than women and the differences of the thinking between the two.

This chapter I really liked because it is very true in what it is saying. While I don't know if there is a way to determine if men always will fire guns faster than women I do think it is true that they jump when there is a window without looking. It seems like every time an opportunity comes up that favors me I find myself going for it and when I ask female friends about it they disagree with my decision saying I should have gotten more information about it first. I don't know if they are saying that men are more risk takers than women are but there definitely seems to be pattern that men will shoot first and women will try to analyze the situation more.

Chapter 10: We All Think We're Above Average

In this chapter we are introduced to the idea that people make mistakes simply because they think they are better at doing a task then they really are. It is this idea that everyone will believe that they are above average at any given task when they likely have no experience or have any idea how well they would do at a task. They looked at experts and why they are better than the average person and even ran tests that showed when the task was harder that people predicted that they would do even better. They also talk about examples where this isn't entirely our fault, it is partially based on lack of feedback.

I think this is a universal truth, people will always believe they are above average at any given task. Unless the person has had some  kind of experience with the topic they will blindly believe that they are in the top of something. In fact it is true that depressed people will actually be more accurate in their predictions of how well they will do in something. Again this is not entirely our fault we should also realize that there is things that can be done to improve design of some things, but in general with predictions there is not a whole lot we can do.

Chapter 11: We'd Rather Wing it:

In this chapter we learn about how people despite the fact that they have no experience at a task would rather try and learn how to do something than go through the process of understanding the task. We look at people who are experts at different tasks and in different fields and realize that they are only that way because they practice a lot every day. Most people however simply want to just be able to do something well enough to get by so that it looks like they understand and this can cause a lot of mistakes to be made.

I think it is true that people in general hate planning and for the most part people are unable to understand a task before they do it. Even in college we want to be able to completely understand how to do a homework before we do it but if we were to do this then we wouldn't have time for much else such as eating or sleeping. Even right now I don't entirely understand all of this chapter but I can wing my understanding well enough to get past this blog and the quiz.

Chapter 12: We Don't Constrain Ourselves

This chapter tells us about how we make mistakes simply because we are unable to constrain the design choices we make. We have too many choices to make in any given scenario and if we were simply to place a few constraints on these there would be a lot less mistakes. In fact we see a lot of examples of how there are numberous different options on many different decides and that causes a lot of mistakes to be needed. If we were to constrain these so that they could only be used one way then it would work a lot better.

I think this information has been presented to us before but in different ways. We know that the best example of this is to look at legos because there is only a few ways they can be put together at any given time so it puts a large constraint that helps us to know how to use them .We also got to see a bit about affordances which are a huge deal in computer science. We know these are essentially different constraints placed on items that let us know how they are used, if an item has enough affordances then we know how to use it instinctively.

Chapter 13: The Grass Does Look Greener

This lets us know that there is always something that looks better, more shiny and newer than what we have. However, shiny things are a bit part of what causes us to make mistakes. We follow the story of a young couple who moves to Hollywood to be more of a part of modern life and be close to the beach and in nice warm weather. However, once they have a child this changes and they start pining for their old home town where everything was a little bit simpler and people were not as stuck up. While it may seem that the good life makes things better it is also know that people are not always happy just because they live in California.

I know things look glamorous and people always think that they are going to get a better life and time when they move to a new place or try something new, however it is not always the case. We tell people that the south things are simpler and its because it is, most activities in the south are a bit simpler because we are very hands off. We think that people should be able to do their own thing and if people are into something that is OK. We don't expect people to do things and we don't have crazy things to make people do to be accepted.

Tuesday, March 22, 2011

Book Reading #6: Obedience to Authority

Obedience  to Authority
Stanley Milgram
Harper Collins Publishers New York, NY

Chapters 1-8:

In these chapters we are introduced to the Milgram obedience experiments and we are given a lot of really in depth information on the design, setup and process of his experiment. We are given all the details as well as some of the variations on the study and how the study started and then was changed to test different factors such as location, actor, groups of people and relative closeness to the person who was the "learner". We are also shown lots of graphs that tracked peoples progress and quantitatively showed how many people proceed to each level of obedience. We also were introduced to various subjects and told about their lives and backgrounds and then were able to see their results as well as their reactions to what they did and their thoughts in the followup interviews. Milgram finishes each of these by explaining from a psychology standpoint what the user was doing and why they made the decision they did.

These chapters were very interesting and it was neat to get to see some of the pictures and the various devices used. Unfortunately for me I have seen videos of a lot of this before that were crudely shot and I have even seen a person performing the activity and heard the voice of the actor as he demands to be let out. I think the most interesting thing I got from this were the graphs. Being able to see it that clearly and drawing lines showing how someone did were very eye opening and you don't realize what percentage of people go all the way until it is in numbers in front of you. One thing I really didn't like was how Milgram seemed to give his view on how each person reacted the way they did. A lot of times it almost felt like he was trying to stick up for the user or make excuses for what they did when really they were no different from the average participant of the experiment. I suppose this comes from the fact that I have my own views on how they reacted and in some cases disagreed with him. Either way it was very interesting and this is one of my favorite books from class so far.

Chapters 9-14:

In these chapters Milgram goes over various aspects of the study in depth and tell us about the psycological factors assocaited with them. He dicusses things suhc as how the experiment is setup and why the design of the experiment leads to the reults that were attained. He talks about how in different places the results are the same and even across different cultures. He talks about how the fact that the person conducting the study was established to be a researcher helps the cause and makes it more believeable. He even discusses things that will make his results less such as having multiple confederates that act against the experimenter first or do all the steps for the person and how they drastically skew the results. It is simply him talking about all the variations on his tests and how the simplest things can change the results completely. He finishes by talking about the successes of the experiment and even other researchers who had doubled his experiments in different settings to see if the results were the same.

The most interesting part again were Milgrams personal views on these and in these cases he did give the Freudian approach which I appreciated. Again, in some cases he gave his rather partial views on how the people were reacting and WHY they reacted the ways they did. I think probably the most interesting of all of it was the last part where people actually duplicated the experiment and showed rather fascinating results. It is strange that the results would ever be higher and apparently this was a really new thing because it did not gather media attention and it was amazing to see how many people had never heard of this. I guess it seems like an experiment that is so known and cultural now that its hard to thing there were people who didnt know.

Monday, March 21, 2011

Ethnography Results Week 6:

I was unable to find a group over the week before spring break as many of the people I was viewing did not hold regular sessions due to tests as was I unable to really participate as I was dealing with three tests and a paper of my own to deal with.

Despite this the project must go on and I was able to find a group over spring break!

The group was slated to go for quite a few hours but the call of  St. Patrick's day cut it short, despite this I was able to get some good information.

I joined a group of friends at one of their houses and we sat down to play. This was the most basic version of DnD which is version 3.5. This is seen as the basis for all other system as this was the last system done by the original creators of DnD and they were able to use their experiences with the past versions to make this one the best and therefore it is considered the most inclusive and most played setting of all. The group was 5 people and I decided not to participate but simply just to observe and see if this being the most basic example gave it more or less interaction and if people treated it any differently. In fact there was a lot more preparation for this and to my surprise A LOT more books involved. In fact each player had their own books and in some cases books were passed around as each PC customized their character in nearly every way they wanted down to eye color and dress.

The system seemed very disorganized but again as with these groups the leader was able to keep things together by simply keeping the conversation on the correct track of character questions and stopping meta conversations that threatened to derail the session or slow it to a halt. Once everyone was settled the story was introduced in a similar manner but in this case with a less descriptive manner. I think this was a personal choice by the DM as these players were familiar with each other and wanted to get to the action more so than the story itself.

The story progressed and the DM told me he wanted to introduce each character to each other by giving them a good fight and seeing how strong they were and what kinds of characters each player had developed. Shortly after this combat there was a little more insignificant role playing by the PCs but nothing different than what was observed in the past so I will focus on combat here.

Combat in DnD is a huge part of the system and nearly changes the roles of each person but not necessarily changes the social interactions observed. Each person controls their characters actions and based on their race, class, and abilities chosen has a number of unique things they can do as well as a set of general abilities (movement, yelling, listening, blocking etc...). The first interesting aspect of this is what is known as initiative, this is a commonly understood action where the players all roll a d20 (twenty sided dice) and add this number to their characters initiative modifier (a character ability). This is an action that once stated "roll for imitative" is done quickly and without argument by anyone, the players are all ranked in order of their score and then this decides who chooses an action first, second and otherwise.

Once this is sorted then the first player can choose his action. The meta-conversations then resume here and the player is allowed to look at his options and then decides what to do. The DM normally remains silent and only speaks to help the player figure out exactly what he wants to do, in some cases the player was ready and had it figured out completely and other times it took awhile for the player and DM to determine the whole action. The interesting part of this is how the DM did not stop other conversations from derailing a players action but simply sat quietly and helped out the player, despite his wanted to be partially adversarial and against him. If a player also needed to look up something from one of the books he or another player would assist him in this and they were able to discuss the action and the other players while offering facts, were not allowed to offer advice as this would be seen as a game action. Also each player was ultimately left up to their own to decide on an action and even if the action was poor or not completely thought through the player took the consequences and the group was left to deal with it. In some cases the action almost seemed downright detrimental to the group, this might be because the player did the action wrong, did the wrong action, or their character intentionally wanted to sabotage the group.

Once an action was taken the group would get SILENT for the DM's reaction to the action and allowed him to figure out what to do next be it have something change in the environment or the monster the players were fighting against to take their own action.

The combat ends once the monsters are all dead, the players are all dead, or some kind of action subdues or convinces the monster to stop fighting with them. Once this is done the players have a set of actions that involve searching the monsters corpse for money and items or a treasure chest guarded by the monster. During this time the DM rolls a lot of dice and periodically says how much gold or what items were found and the group decides as whole who to give it to or to split it.

At the end of the session experience is awarded based on how many and what quality of monsters were fought as well as other player actions done. Experience is used for PC's to make their character stronger and "level up" which is a means of upgrading all of a characters abilities and strength in a formatted pre-defined way as specified by the DnD handbooks.

In all combat is the most unique experience of the entire session and can make a session a lot more or a lot less intense. It is definitely the time when there is the least meta-conversation and each person is focusing the most on what is going on. It to me seems like the most exciting part of DnD and I wished I had gotten o do more when I participated but it is definitely the time people enjoy the most and they do their best to help our their team during this time.

Monday, March 7, 2011

Paper Reading #15: Eddi: Interactive Topic-based Browsing of Social Status Streams

Comment 1: http://chiblog.sjmorrow.com/2011/03/paper-reading-14-combining-multiple.html
Comment 2: http://angel-at-chi.blogspot.com/2011/03/paper-reading-14.html

Eddi: Interactive Topic-based Browsing of Social Status Streams
Michael S. Bernstein, Bongwon Suh, Lichan Hong, Jilin Chen, Sanjay Kairam, Ed H. Chi
User Interface Software and Technology

This article focuses on some graduate students research into a way to organize the giant haze of messages that are social networks, in this case, a UI to help organize tweets. The group made a dashboard similar to Tweetdeck that organizes tweets into groups based on their topics and in some cases based on their hash tags. The group sees the need for this kind of work but no one had a good way of organizing all these. They found that using a search engine and treating each tweet similar to a search that there was a very easy way to organize them based on their keywords and subject matter. There was no state of art to go off of so this project was built from the ground up with all original ideas. They decided to name their system Eddi and the main component of it was the user interface that was associated with it that helped the user to organize tweets. The system then organizes them into groups for the user to easily navigate. They broke them into about thirty five different topics and the users can add different once based on a keyword or hash tag. The users actually found this system rather enjoyable. While they even mention in the paper that the search engine isn't entirely accurate users found the experience enjoyable and well designed. They said that they key to this is that it combines topics and allows the user to be able to see more than just organization by keywords.


This paper was very interesting but I really cant see myself wanting to pay for something like this. It seems like a service that would be a free add on to my current twitter if I so choose. I also am not liking the idea of twitter as much anymore because of the ways in which it is currently being used. A lot of the people that I have followed have done nothing buy spam advertisements for things and updates telling me to visit a website than the users lifestream. If it would be possible touse the search engine to filter these kinds of tweets out then it would be really nice as well. I also am not sure but their claim that a user can have up to 1000 tweets a day seems rather high. I don't know if twitter is as followed as something like facebook and the extent to which this is used might be limited at best. I think it is a solid idea and if they can get the functionality out of it that they wish it will become a valuable tool. If the search algorithm works well at 40% and helps to break tweets down to combine topics in a meaningful way then I don't see it not being useful and as the algorithm is refined getting better and better.

Wednesday, March 2, 2011

Paper Reading #14: Madgets: Actuating Widgets on Interactive Tabletops

Note: I skipped the number between 12 and 14 out of superstition.

Comment 1: http://chiblog.sjmorrow.com/2011/03/paper-reading-13-teslatouch.html
Comment 2: http://csce436-nabors.blogspot.com/2011/02/reading-13-teslatouch-electrovibration.html

Madgets: Actuating Widgets on Interactive Tabletops
Malte Weiss, Florian Schwarz, Simon Jakubowski, Jan Borchers
User Interface Software and Technology

This paper covered the use of devices that the authors are calling Madgets. They are magnetic devices that interact with surface tabletop computers that allow the user to have further control. As tabletop computing is becoming more and more available and much more research is being done with it many people are being asked to use these devices without knowing how to use them or being able to easily use the multi-touch features to their fullest. These various devices will help in this and make the transition easier on users. The current state of art uses devices called SLAPWidgets that allow for objects like buttons, knobs, sliders and other simple manipulation tools but these again have limited use and are sometimes views as cumbersome. This group plans to use the known premise of under-table camera projection combined with a layer of electromagnets for positioning that will allow a wide variety of devices to be adapted to the table and assist in its production. There has also been work done with haptic feedback and tangible pucks that the user grabs with their whole hand and use them to perform the action (SO COOL!!). The authors then went into their lengthy discussion of the hardware involved and the algorithms used to detect where different objects were on the table and were placed and how they moved over the table. The authors did say that while their system requires a lot of user testing to see how people really take to it, the prototype was not quite finished as they were still working out some of the mechanics and they had yet to complete these. They were in this process and eager to get going so that they can get some of the valuable user feedback.

Again this is another fascinating system that has too many technical requirements that I don't overly understand and there is no prototype built and no study done that I can't do more research into it and see how users are ACTUALLY using it versus how the authors thought it would take. I really like the idea that if I was using a multi-touch tabletop I would be able to have a various number of devices that would allow this experience to be more modal and more natural feeling. I think that if tabletop computers become a real thing they will have lots of items set on them and for the most part be treated like tables. If it were the case that a system like this could be adapted to detect any kind of object then it would be neat to be able to use my bottle of water as a control and flick through news articles in the morning or be able to watch some internet tv while making my morning toast. In fact these services would possibly be the future of computing and even have uses in solving crimes or being able to identify who an object belongs to and what it has been used for. Imagine if we could place a murder weapon or a piece of one onto a table and the table tells us who it belongs to and when it was purchased. I think the project is a good start into this kind of technology and hope it gets more done with it in the future.