開始時刻
前のセッションの直後
この勉強会は終了しました。ご参加ありがとうございました。
Participatory sensing refers to the sensing paradigm where human participants use personal mobile devices to generate and share data from their surroundings. It holds the promise of providing information that is otherwise challenging to access, which sets the stage for understanding and resolving various social issues. However, difficulties in engaging participants often hinder the fulfillment of this promise. The current paper presents a qualitative study in the context of dockless bikesharing, where participatory sensing constitutes a backbone of the bike status monitoring system. We conducted in-depth interviews with 30 participants. These participants came from different emergent groups who took part in filing status reports for shared bikes. Our analysis indicated close associations among participants' models of engagement, their perceived (dis)connections with the sensing data, and their situated interpretation of the incentives. Based on these findings, we propose ways to engage the commons in participatory sensing for dockless bikesharing and beyond.
Recent years have witnessed the rise of platforms such as Facebook and Google. Gigantic in scope and becoming omnipresent, these platforms are acquiring qualities of infrastructure, which is large-scale connected systems that support people's activities invisibly. Recent scholarship has identified WeChat, the most popular mobile social platform in China, as infrastructure. WeChat follows a platform logic to expand, and by conforming to the Chinese government's techno-nationalist focus, it has gradually become an infrastructure in China. We contribute to the understanding of platform infrastructuralization by taking WeChat as a case, highlighting the user's role in this process. We find user contributes to WeChat's infrastructuralization through a three-level interaction process: to practice, to appropriate, and to create. By calling out the user's role in platform infra-structuralization, we discuss how the CHI community can contribute to a better understanding of this phenomenon.
Crowdsourcing platforms are increasingly being harnessed for creative work. The platforms' potential for creative work is clearly identified, but the workers' perspectives on such work have not been extensively documented. In this paper, we uncover what the workers have to say about creative work on paid crowdsourcing platforms. Through a quantitative and qualitative analysis of a questionnaire launched on two different crowdsourcing platforms, our results revealed clear differences between the workers on the platforms in both preferences and prior experience with creative work. We identify common pitfalls with creative work on crowdsourcing platforms, provide recommendations for requesters of creative work, and discuss the meaning of our findings within the broader scope of creativity-oriented research. To the best of our knowledge, we contribute the first extensive worker-oriented study of creative work on paid crowdsourcing platforms.
The strains associated with shift work decrease healthcare workers' well-being. However, shift schedules adapted to their individual needs can partially mitigate these problems. From a computing perspective, shift scheduling was so far mainly treated as an optimization problem with little attention given to the preferences, thoughts, and feelings of the healthcare workers involved. In the present study, we explore fairness as a central, human-oriented attribute of shift schedules as well as the scheduling process. Three in-depth qualitative interviews and a validating vignette study revealed that while on an abstract level healthcare workers agree on equality as the guiding norm for a fair schedule, specific scheduling conflicts should foremost be resolved by negotiating the importance of individual needs. We discuss elements of organizational fairness, including transparency and team spirit. Finally, we present a sketch for fair scheduling systems, summarizing key findings for designers in a readily usable way.
This paper addresses the design dilemmas that arise when distributed ledger technologies (DLT) are to be applied in the governance of artificial material commons. DLTs, such as blockchain, are often presented as enabling technologies for self-governing communities, provided by their consensus mechanisms, transparent administration, and incentives for collaboration and cooperation. Yet, these affordances may also undermine public values such as privacy and displace human agency in governance procedures. In this paper, the conflicts regarding the governance of communities which collectively manage and produce a commons are discussed through the case of a fictional energy community. Three mechanisms are identified in this process: tracking use of and contributions to the commons; managing resources, and negotiating the underlying rule sets and user rights. Our effort is aimed at contributing to the HCI community by introducing a framework of three mechanisms and six design dilemmas that can aid in balancing conflicting values in the design of local platforms for commons-based resource management.