Making Use of Scenarios for Achieving Effective Use in Community Computing Contexts

The concept of effective use is gaining currency as a way of thinking about usability in community informatics. Broadly defined, effective use is the opportunity and capacity of a community group to leverage information communications technologies (ICTs) in order to achieve their goals. Although effective use is a worthy goal, a process for achieving effective use is not clearly defined. This paper combines the concept of scenarios from human-computer interaction (HCI) and participatory design (PD) in order to identify a design process to enhance participation and technological decision making in community information systems design projects. Our process for achieving effective use focuses first on the efficacy of scenarios as a tool to encourage and support participatory design, and second as an anchoring and adjustment heuristic. This study concludes with future research on effective use in community informatics.

[1]  E. Sundstrom,et al.  Work teams: Applications and effectiveness. , 1990 .

[2]  Mary Beth Rosson,et al.  Participatory design in community computing contexts: tales from the field , 2004, PDC 04.

[3]  Mary Beth Rosson,et al.  Scenario-based design , 2002 .

[4]  Herbert A. Simon,et al.  The Structure of Ill Structured Problems , 1973, Artif. Intell..

[5]  Mary Beth Rosson,et al.  Narrowing the specification-implementation gap in scenario-based design , 1995 .

[6]  Morten Kyng,et al.  Creating contexts for design , 1995 .

[7]  A. Tversky,et al.  Judgment under Uncertainty: Heuristics and Biases , 1974, Science.

[8]  George P. Huber,et al.  The Decision-Making Paradigm of Organizational Design , 1986 .

[9]  Ann Peterson Bishop,et al.  Scenarios in the Afya project as a participatory action research (PAR) tool for studying information seeking and use across the "digital divide" , 2002, J. Assoc. Inf. Sci. Technol..

[10]  Mary Beth Rosson,et al.  Usability Engineering: Scenario-based Development of Human-Computer Interaction , 2001 .

[11]  Lisa J. Servon.  The Organizational Divide , 2008 .

[12]  Colin Potts,et al.  Design of Everyday Things , 1988 .

[13]  Eric L. Lesser.  Knowledge and Social Capital: Foundations and Applications , 2000 .

[14]  M. Gurstein.  Effective use: A community informatics strategy beyond the Digital Divide , 2003, First Monday.

[15]  S. Ghoshal,et al.  Social Capital, Intellectual Capital, and the Organizational Advantage , 1998 .

[16]  Matthias Jarke,et al.  Scenario Management: An Interdisciplinary Approach , 1998, Requirements Engineering.

[17]  Lisa J. Servon.  Bridging the Digital Divide: Technology, Community, and Public Policy , 2002 .

[18]  Robert D. Putnam,et al.  Bowling alone: the collapse and revival of American community , 2000, CSCW '00.

[19]  J. Schneider.  Small, minority‐based nonprofits in the information age , 2003 .

[20]  Gareth R. Jones,et al.  Understanding and Managing Organizational Behavior , 1995 .

[21]  John M. Carroll,et al.  Community computing as human ‐ computer interaction , 2001, Behav. Inf. Technol..

[22]  Mary Beth Rosson,et al.  Participatory Design as Apprenticeship: Sustainable Watershed Management as a Community Computing Application , 2005, Proceedings of the 38th Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences.

[23]  Peter P. Groenewegen,et al.  Social networks and performance. , 2006 .

[24]  Morten Hertzum,et al.  Making use of scenarios: a field study of conceptual design , 2003, Int. J. Hum. Comput. Stud..

[25]  A. Tversky,et al.  The framing of decisions and the psychology of choice. , 1981, Science.

[26]  R. Putnam.  Tuning In, Tuning Out: The Strange Disappearance of Social Capital in America , 1995, PS: Political Science & Politics.

[27]  P. Adler,et al.  Social Capital: Prospects for a New Concept , 2002 .