I've gotten into ISCRAM 2007's conference papers, and am about 1/5 of the way through the list.  There's some interesting papers in here.

In this post I'm going to talk about this paper in particular: A Dynamic Delphi Process Utilizing a Modified Thurstone Scaling Method: Collaborative Judgement in Emergency Response.

The paper is interesting because it's covering a higher level of decision making than what I've been reading about in Klein's "Sources of Power: How people make decisions".  This is discussing collaborative strategic decision making process instead of "groundpounders at the scene" decision making processes.  From their conclusion:

Even when all experts in a group may not be able to participate at the moment, or some may be unqualified to vote in a particular matter, nonetheless, a decision must be made. This system is conducive for decision making given the worst of conditions, utilizing the information as well as the experts to their fullest capacity. In a disaster, it may appear that there are only poor selections after such a tragic event has occurred. However, a best decision must still be made, thus minimizing potential future damages and hence, maximizing the best obtainable outcome for the challenges that lay ahead.

While the method described in the paper seems workable, I don't know that it could be implemented in practice, due to the conflicts of agendas.  I could see this being used as a strategic planning method, however -> trying to establish cross-disciplinary response scenarios prior to an event taking place. 

[More]

As I was writing my new entry for this week’s research blog, I came upon a dilemma of the research progress and interests.  Since I have been read the articles through IS 362, I found some of interesting research methods. Especially, we dealt with some of the economics IS paper for Wiki.

Actually, I have never seen the paper of combination of Economics and Information Systems. Anyway, I was pretty interested in the Econ IS. I started to feel that I am capturing some theory kind of economics that I wanted to say about the Web 2.0 as a research model in future studies. Applying the concept of Two-Side Network Externality to indicate the characteristics of Web 2.0 such as Wiki and UCC, my pop-up interest is intended to provide a broader understanding of the behaviors for web users. I am not sure exactly but I will be provided an analytical framework of the interaction between web users and UCC. Previous studies focus on the analysis of each variable solely but I examine if web users prefer UCC and how they affect the value of firm.   

In fact, there are a few studies which conduct UCC, but they did not base on economic perspective.  While Web 2.0 is an opportunity for both consumer and firm with economic merit, there is no study using an economic viewpoint.  Additionally, my new interest will notify the reason why people visit UCC site and what is a benefit of UCC to consumers.  Also I have one more idea that I will search for why the Internet sites try to attract web users to their pages and the marginal revenue to firm with the increasing number of visitors.  Even though there are difficulties to measure the field, this study will apply some theoretic base which widely accepted in the Internet community.  

[More]

PSPP - Open source SPSS (http://www.gnu.org/software/pspp/)

r-Project - (http://www.r-project.org/) 

More here :

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_statistical_packages

and here:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_statistical_packages 

[More]

Change Record Request system (CRRS)

This is the synopsis of Change Record Request System (CRRS) which is part of the Change Record Management System (CRMS) suite that I am working on. It provides a means for information systems analysts to seek approval from a supervisor or a manager before downing an ailing server or other critical network objects. This is different from when a server or network object goes down abruptly as a result of hardware or software problem and a trouble ticket is generated. Rather it is when an analyst observes an abnormality in the course of operation of a server and decides to perform a maintenance work on the server in order to avoid crash, loss of data and prolonged downtime.

CRRS provides the analyst the means and interface to do the following:

·         Report the problem to superiors with problem description

·         Give estimated hours / minutes of downtime

·         Establish a paper trail to show that the superiors were duly notified before downing a critical network object. In other words, CRRS serves as a security for the analyst. This is because with the approval of the supervisor or manager, the whole blame due to prolonged downtime as a result of unforeseen circumstances during maintenance will not be on the analyst alone.

CRRS affords the supervisor and the manager the opportunity to evaluate the problem in terms of impact on users and business processes and then make recommendation to the analyst on the best day and time to perform the maintenance work.

CRRS is comprised of three form interfaces which include: Change record request form, decision form and maintenance completion notification form.

[More]

Currently, I am intersted in web users of UCC and am interested in Csikszentimihalyi’s definition of flow in terms of web users for particular activities or enjoyment in virtual world.  I have developed some research question from last semester to present.

In the personal interest as indicated above, I would like to extend the current flow research in the following UCC services, and answer the following questions:

• Which personal factors lead to participation in UCC services?
• Why people participate in UCC service, especially the 3 major components of flow experience – concentration, self-esteem, and positive-thinking.
• What are the effective and efficient approaches to understanding participation in UCC services?

I think I need to apply regression analysis to each independent variable of UCC participation, to compare R-squared for each model, and to use R-squared as criteria (the highest value of R-squared is the most efficient model), I am thinking about the first, second, and third degree regression. Here, I would note that the first, second, and third degree regressions refer to the number of independent variables even though their statistical definitions do not necessarily imply that.  

For these research questions, the conceptual model of flow in terms of web users will be composed of:

• The core experience of flow;
• Close correlates of flow experience, such as concentration, self-esteem, and positive-feeling (or rewarding);
• Antecedents of flow, including skill, challenge, interactivity, attention, teleprespence, etc;
• Consequences of flow, including positive affect, exploratory behavior, etc.

[More]

In my blog this week I would like to look at our Neuman reading with regard to Historical- Comparative Research. I thought this chapter was pretty good and went relatively fast. However, I have to admit it is not my most favorite aspect of research. (Then again I don’t have enough under my belt to make that claim I guess…J) Rather I would like to bring up a portion of the book’s chapter ( and our learning object) which raises an enormous strength of H-C Research regardless of your opinion on it.

By this, I mean patterns. Everything about life has some sort of micro/ macro scale pattern to it. That is its DNA, sequence, or defining structure. As a matter of fact, patterns are the only thing we as humans may deduce the term reality to be. The real power in H-C research may be the actual output of the research. I mean, one very well may be able to discover theory, knowledge, or some other attribute of social context in H-C Research. However, it is what may not be said explicitly in H-C that could yield a much more powerful result. Patterns of life. The way we go about everything in our daily life is predicated upon by some pattern or another. Most likely this type of pattern is common. That is, we do it because we are used to it. However, what if one observed a completely different pattern in a different context and applied it as a substitution to a commonly used pattern in our daily life or solving a problem?

I know (like usual) this blog may sound ridiculous, off- the- wall, blah, blah… However, my point of all this is to say if we observe patterns of output from H-C Research (or any other observable pattern output) we may be able view everything though a different guise. That is, if one actually disciplines themselves to sit and physically feel this output pattern (think it through and how it may be implied), it could prove very powerful for the human intellect.  And I’m out.

-Rick Awesome

[More]

Hi all,

Here is the paper entitled "Being Proactive: Where Action Research meets Design Research" from ICIS 2005.

http://conversation.cgu.edu/is362r/files/-1/1319/ICIS-Cole-Purao-Rossi-Sein-2005_by_Matti.pdf 

I hope this paper help your better understanding between Action Research and Design Research.

[More]

[More]

Dr. Olfman mentioned that I have to develop an artifact or possible questionnaire to enhance flow experiences. Also, he commented that he didn’t find an evaluation connection in my research idea. I think that’s a great point to construct structural model as a artifact in the research.

Therefore, I think I need an advanced conceptual model of Flow. I found the some of conceptual model of flow from previous studies. Hoffman and Novak’s (1996) conceptual model of flow describes high skills, and challenged and focused attention influence flow, and interactive and telepresense enhance flow. 

As Dr.Olman mentioned via comments and feedback, my study has to develop a comprehensive instrument for measuring the constructs discussed in the conceptual model from previous studies. My objective is to develop a comprehensive list that has been previously used to measure by Hoffman and Novak (1996): flow, skill, challenge, control, attention focus, concentration, telepresence, curiosity, intrinsic interest, self esteem, outer structure of task, and performance.

Given the above measures, I’ll develop an extended and revised conceptual model and measurements. The Hoffman and Novak’s conceptual model is very good, and the revised model will be quite consistent with the original model.

Finally, while I hypothesize that function is identical to flow, the improved model with my revised measurements will be help to anlayze why certain UCC users and creators emerge in UCC.  I will attempt to identify a reasonable, good-fitting model to solve the research questions. With my model. I think I have to add or delete some paths of my own revised models.

[More]

Gary Klein's "Sources of Power: How people make decisions" arrived from Amazon.  I've started reading it and so far it is fascinating.   Klein starts off by explaining rational choice theory and immediately sets out explaining why this approach (measured analysis of various possible decisions to arrive at a maximally efficient decision) is diametrically opposed to the way decisions are made under duress and time pressure. 

Foundational, it is.  Somewhat distracting from my other project, it is as well.

However, I've given it some serious thought, and IF I had three weeks to spend dedicated to my other project, I'd be wrapping that puppy up before the end of April.  Since I don't, it's going to take me three months.  Context switching alone means that I can't jump into that project unless I have a serious block of time to dedicate to it.  Compare this to reading foundational literature which, unlike paper reading, requires little in the way of blocking out and meta-tagging... it's easy to pick this book up and read a few dozen pages and find a good place to stop.

[More]