Search (5 results, page 1 of 1)

  • × year_i:[2000 TO 2010}
  • × author_ss:"Pejtersen, A.M."
  1. Albrechtsen, H.; Pejtersen, A.M.: Cognitive work analysis and work centered design of classification schemes (2003) 0.00 
    0.0026849252 = product of:
  0.0053698504 = sum of:
    0.0053698504 = product of:
      0.010739701 = sum of:
        0.010739701 = weight(_text_:a in 3005) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.010739701 = score(doc=3005,freq=14.0), product of:
            0.053105544 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046056706 = queryNorm
            0.20223314 = fieldWeight in 3005, product of:
              3.7416575 = tf(freq=14.0), with freq of:
                14.0 = termFreq=14.0
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3005)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Abstract
    Work centered design of classification schemes is an emerging area of research which poses particular challenges to domain analysis and scheme construction. A key challenge in work centered design of classification schemes is the evolving semantics of work. This article introduces a work centered approach to the design of classification schemes, based an the framework of cognitive work analysis. We launch collaborative task situations as a new unit of analysis for capturing evolving semantic structures in work domains. An example case from a cognitive work analysis of three national film research archives illustrates the application of the framework for identifying actors' needs for a classification scheme to support collaborative knowledge integration. It is concluded that a main contribution of the new approach is support for empirical analysis and overall design of classification schemes that can serve as material interfaces for actors' negotiations and integration of knowledge perspectives during collaborative work.
    Type
    a
  2. Pejtersen, A.M.; Albrechtsen, H.: Ecological work based classification schemes (2000) 0.00 
    0.0025370158 = product of:
  0.0050740317 = sum of:
    0.0050740317 = product of:
      0.010148063 = sum of:
        0.010148063 = weight(_text_:a in 153) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.010148063 = score(doc=153,freq=18.0), product of:
            0.053105544 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046056706 = queryNorm
            0.19109234 = fieldWeight in 153, product of:
              4.2426405 = tf(freq=18.0), with freq of:
                18.0 = termFreq=18.0
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=153)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Abstract
    This paper introduces a new approach to the design of classification schemes for complex work domains to help structure the knowledge domains in databases for single users and multiple users in co-operative work. Ecological work based classification schemes are designed on the basis of an empirical analysis of the invariant structures of the work domain and of the information needs of its actors. Invariant structures of a work domain can be explicit or implicit (hidden structures). The invariant structures are identified through empirical analysis of field studies in work domains, guided by the use of a means ends abstraction hierarchy. This hierarchy provides a model for analyzing, or-ganizing and relating different levels of properties within a work domain. The resulting structure is an ecological classification scheme, comprising the different dimensions or categories of domain information that needs to be available for an actor to make a decision. Contrary to traditional classification systems which usually are designed from one particular point of view (a single discipline, paradigm or purpose), ecological classification schemes provide a transparent and structured information environment in which actors can navigate freely according to their current perspectives of work and subjective preferences
    Type
    a
  3. Pejtersen, A.M.; Albrechtsen, H.: Models for collaborative integration of knowledge (2003) 0.00 
    0.0023435948 = product of:
  0.0046871896 = sum of:
    0.0046871896 = product of:
      0.009374379 = sum of:
        0.009374379 = weight(_text_:a in 2755) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.009374379 = score(doc=2755,freq=24.0), product of:
            0.053105544 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046056706 = queryNorm
            0.17652355 = fieldWeight in 2755, product of:
              4.8989797 = tf(freq=24.0), with freq of:
                24.0 = termFreq=24.0
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=2755)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Abstract
    Collaborative integration of knowledge in distributed and cross-disciplinary work domains poses a number of challenges to classification, comprising: 1) how to analyze the actors' current practice of integration of knowledge and 2) how to model consistent semantic support of diverse interpretive perspectives among the actors. This paper introduces a cognitive systems engineering approach to modelling collaborative integration of knowledge in work domains. A generic means-ends model provides a theoretical foundation for mapping the territory of collaborative work. A decision task model captures the actors' distributed decision-making in integration of knowledge. The problem of collaborative integration of knowledge in a distributed web-based film collaboratory is explored through an empirical case of collaborative film indexing. The empirical study identified a lack of tools for consistent support of integration of knowledge. The means-ends model and the decision task model guided the design of a conceptual structure of the common workspace of film indexing. The paper concludes with a proposal for further work an models for integration of knowledge through ecological classification schemes. 1. Introduction Current work practice and knowledge production to an increasing degree involves actors from different disciplines, cultures and organisations. Additionally, current work practice not only relies an authoritative orderings of knowledge, but also relies an the dynamism of the actors' ongoing collaborative integration of knowledge, i.e. their shared interpretations of knowledge, exchange of perspectives and joint knowledge production. Consequently, in order to support the actors' ongoing collaborative integration of knowledge, the design of support tools, like classification schemes, must address not only the order of knowledge, but also the situational contexts where collaborative integration of knowledge occurs. This paper introduces an ecological approach to integration of knowledge across boundaries in distributed collaboratory work environments, which is founded an (a) work domain analysis (b) the development of models for collaborative integration of knowledge. The work domain analysis is based an means-ends analysis of the territory of work and the actors' information needs during decision making. The result is conceptual structures of collaborative work that can be used to create collaborative classification schemes. Previous work an design of ecological classification schemes proposed that such schemes should be based an a finegrained empirical analysis of actors' collaborative decision tasks in order to identify the knowledge produced and needed by the actors (Pejtersen & Albrechtsen, 2000).
    Type
    a
  4. Albrechtsen, H.; Andersen, H.H.K.; Cleal, B.; Pejtersen, A.M.: Categorical complexity in knowledge integration : empirical evaluation of a cross-cultural film research collaboratory (2004) 0.00 
    0.002269176 = product of:
  0.004538352 = sum of:
    0.004538352 = product of:
      0.009076704 = sum of:
        0.009076704 = weight(_text_:a in 2617) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.009076704 = score(doc=2617,freq=10.0), product of:
            0.053105544 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046056706 = queryNorm
            0.1709182 = fieldWeight in 2617, product of:
              3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
                10.0 = termFreq=10.0
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2617)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Abstract
    The paper presents a qualitative empirical evaluation of the Collate collaboratory, with special emphasis on management of knowledge integration and categorical complexity. The empirical evaluation of the Collate collaboratory was conducted in an evaluation workshop where professionals from the archives collaborated an co-creation of film censorship history, interacted with prototypes and discussed the use problems with the evaluators. The collaboratory features two distinct modules for management of knowledge integration in the common workspace, through annotation and indexing of documents. The empirical evaluation indicates that the deeper semantics of knowledge integration evolves in collaborative task situations, where the work processes of annotation and indexing are inexorably linked in the professionals' collaborative decision-making, and that there is a need for a consistent and uniform semantic support of management of knowledge integration in the collaboratory.
    Type
    a
  5. Fidel, R.; Pejtersen, A.M.; Cleal, B.; Bruce, H.: ¬A multidimensional approach to the study of human-information interaction : a case study of collaborative information retrieval (2004) 0.00 
    0.002269176 = product of:
  0.004538352 = sum of:
    0.004538352 = product of:
      0.009076704 = sum of:
        0.009076704 = weight(_text_:a in 2997) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.009076704 = score(doc=2997,freq=10.0), product of:
            0.053105544 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046056706 = queryNorm
            0.1709182 = fieldWeight in 2997, product of:
              3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
                10.0 = termFreq=10.0
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2997)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Abstract
    While most research in the area of human-information behavior has focused an a single dimension-either the psychological or the social-this case study demonstrated the importance of a multidimensional approach. The Cognitive Work Analysis framework guided this field study of one event of collaborative information retrieval (CIR) carried out by design engineers at Microsoft, including observations and interviews. Various dimensions explained the motives for this CIR event and the challenges the participants encountered: the cognitive dimension, the specific task and decision, the organization of the teamwork, and the organizational culture. Even though it is difficult at times to separate one dimension from another, and all are interdependent, the analysis uncovered several reasons for design engineers to engage in CIR, such as when they are new to the organization or the team, when the information lends itself to various interpretations, or when most of the needed information is not documented. Similar multidimensional studies will enhance our understanding of human-information behavior.
    Type
    a

Authors

Themes