Luff2000
| Luff2000 | |
|---|---|
| BibType | ARTICLE |
| Key | Luff2000 |
| Author(s) | Paul Luff, Christian C. Heath |
| Title | The collaborative production of computer commands in command and control |
| Editor(s) | |
| Tag(s) | EMCA, Ethnography, CSCW, Workplace studies, Command and control |
| Publisher | |
| Year | 2000 |
| Language | |
| City | |
| Month | |
| Journal | International Journal of Human-Computer Studies |
| Volume | 52 |
| Number | 4 |
| Pages | 669–699 |
| URL | Link |
| DOI | 10.1006/ijhc.1999.0354 |
| ISBN | |
| Organization | |
| Institution | |
| School | |
| Type | |
| Edition | |
| Series | |
| Howpublished | |
| Book title | |
| Chapter | |
Abstract
In this paper, we examine the details of the use of a computer system in situ. Drawing from recent developments in the social sciences, we adopt an analytic orientation that is distinctive from much current work in human–computer interaction and cognitive engineering. Rather than focusing on a circumscribed activity of an individual at a computer system, we explore how the production of computer-based activities is sensitive to the ongoing work and interaction of the participants in the setting. The study utilizes materials including fieldwork and audio-visual recordings to explore how one particular technology is used, a system for automatically controlling trains on an urban transportation system. We focus on the “uses” of this system, a fairly conventional command-and-control system, in the Control Room, and examine how the technology is immersed within the action and interaction of the participants. In particular, we explore how the entry of commands into the system by one controller is coordinated with the conduct of colleagues, and how their conduct is inextricably embedded in their colleague's use of the system. It also reveals how the activities of controllers are managed from moment to moment, so that a division of labour emerges through the course of their interaction. Although in drawing upon naturalistic materials, this study contributes to the growing corpus of “workplace studies” within the field of computer-supported cooperative work, by examining the details of computer-based activities it continues the tradition within human-computer interaction of being concerned with the detailed use of technologies. Indeed, the emerging distinction between the two fields, one considered as focusing on matters associated with the individual “user”, and the other on the “group”, may be false.
Notes
