Advertisement

“Scales” Affecting Design Communication in Collaborative Virtual Environments

  • Jeff W. T. Kan
  • Jerry J. -H. Tsai
  • Xiangyu Wang
Part of the Intelligent Systems, Control and Automation: Science and Engineering book series (ISCA, volume 48)

Abstract

This chapter explores the impacts of large and small scales of designed objects towards the communication in three-dimensional collaborative virtual environments. The motivations are twofold: 1) to better understand design communications in virtual environments; 2) to suggest improvements of present virtual environments so as to better support design communications.

Keywords

Virtual Environment Design Task Protocol Analysis Design Project Collaborative Design 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Allen, T.J., Lee, D.M., Tushman, M.L.: R&D performance as a function of internal communication, project management, and the nature of work. IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management, EM 27, 2–12 (1980)Google Scholar
  2. Bull, P.: Communication Under The Microscope: The Theory and Practice of Microanalysis, Routledge, Hove, East Sussex (2002)Google Scholar
  3. Cross, N., Christiaans, H., Dorst, K.: Introduction: the Delft protocols workshop. In: Cross, N., et al. (eds.) Analysing Design Activity, pp. 1–14. John Wily & Son, Chichester (1996)Google Scholar
  4. Cross, N., Cross, A.C.: Observation of teamwork and social processes in design. In: Cross, N., et al. (eds.) Analysing Design Activity, pp. 291–317. John Wily & Son, Chichester (1996)Google Scholar
  5. Eastman, C.: On the analysis of intuitive design processes. In: Moore, G.T. (ed.) Emerging Methods in Environmental Design and Planning: Proceedings of the Design Methods Group first International Conference, Cambridge, MA, June 1968, pp. 21–37 (1970)Google Scholar
  6. Friedman, D., Steed, A., Slater, M.: Spatial Social Behavior in Second Life. In: Proceedings of the 7th international Conference on Intelligent Virtual Agents, pp. 252–263. Springer, Heidelberg (2007)Google Scholar
  7. Hewes, D.E.: A socio-egocentric model of group decision-making. In: Hirokawa, R.Y., Poole, M.S. (eds.) Communication and Group Decision-Making, pp. 265–291. Sage, Beberly Hills (1986)Google Scholar
  8. Hewes, D.E.: Small group communication not ingluence dscision making: An amplication of socio-egocentric theory. In: Hirokawa, R.Y., Poole, M.S. (eds.) Communication and Group Decision Making, pp. 179–214. Sage, Thousand Oaks (1996)Google Scholar
  9. Kavakli, M., Gero, J.S.: Strategic knowledge differences between an expert and a novice designer: an experimental study. In: Lindemann, U., Dummy (eds.) Human Behaviour in Design (2003)Google Scholar
  10. Kvan, T.: Collaborative design: What is it? Automation in Construction 9(4), 409–415 (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Levinson, S.C.: Pragmatics. Cambridge University Press, New York (1983)Google Scholar
  12. Minneman, S.L.: The Social Construction of a Technical Reality: Empirical Studies of the Social Activity of Engineering Design Practice, PhD Thesis, Mechanical Engineering, Stanford University, Stanford (1991)Google Scholar
  13. Olson, G.M., Olson, J.S.: Distance matters. Human -Computer Interaction 15(2/3), 130–178 (2000)Google Scholar
  14. Oslon, G.M., Oslon, J.S., Carter, M.R., Storrosten, M.: Small group design meetings: an analysis of collaboration. Human -Computer Interaction 7(4), 347–374 (1992)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Salter, A., Gann, D.: Sources of ideas for innovation in engineering design. Research Policy 32(8), 1309–1324 (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Sanchez-Vives, V., Slater, M.: From presence to consciousness. Nature 6, 8–15 (2005)Google Scholar
  17. Sonnenwald, D.H.: Communication roles that support collaboration during the design process. Design Studies 17(3), 277–301 (1996)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Stempfle, J., Badke-Schaub, P.: Thinking in design teams - an analysis of team communication. Design Studies 23(5), 473–496 (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Suwa, M., Purcell, T., Gero, J.S.: Macroscopic analysis of design processes based on a scheme for coding designers’ cognitive actions. Design Studies 19(4), 455–483 (1998)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Suwa, M., Purcell, T., Gero, J.S.: Unexpected discoveries and s-invention of design requirements: important vehicles for a design process. Design Studies 21(6), 539–567 (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Suwa, M., Tversky, B.: What do architects and students perceive in their design sketchs? A protocol analysis. Design Studies 18(4), 385–403 (1997)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Tang, H.H.: Exploring the Roles of Sketches and Knowledge in Design Process, PhD Thesis, Architecture, University of Sydney, Sydney (2002)Google Scholar
  23. Tang, J.C.: Findings from observational studies of collaborative work. International Journal of Man-Machine Studies 34, 143–160 (1991)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Tsai, J.J.-H., Wang, X., Huang, Y.: Studying different scales of collaborative designs in real and virtual environments. In: ANZAScA2008, Newcastle, Australia, pp. 277–284 (2008)Google Scholar
  25. Tsai, J.J.-H., Wang, X., Kan, J.W.T., Huang, Y.: Impacts of Different Scales on Design Collaboration in 3D Virtual Environments (2009) (working paper)Google Scholar
  26. Tushman, M.L., Katz, R.: External communication and project performance: An investigation into the role of gatekeepers. Management Science 26(11), 1071–1085 (1980)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Vera, A.H., Kvan, T., West, R.L., Lai, S.: Expertise and collaborative design. In: CHI 1998 Conference Proceedings, Los Angeles, pp. 503–510 (1998)Google Scholar
  28. Visser, W.: The function of gesture in an architectural design meeting. In: DTRS7 Design Meeting Protocols Proceedings, pp. 197–210 (2007)Google Scholar
  29. Zolin, R., Hinds, P.J., Fruchter, R., Levitt, R.E.: Interpersonal trust in cross-functional, geographically distributed work: a longitudinal study. Information and Organization, 1–26 (2004)Google Scholar
  30. van Someren, M.W., Barnard, Y.F., Sandberg, J.A.C.: The Think Aloud Method: A Practical Guide to Modelling Cognitive Processes. Academic Press, San Diego (1994)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Netherlands 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  • Jeff W. T. Kan
    • 1
  • Jerry J. -H. Tsai
    • 2
  • Xiangyu Wang
    • 3
  1. 1.Taylor’s University CollegeMalaysia
  2. 2.Yuan Ze UniversityTaiwan
  3. 3.The University of New South WalesAustralia

Personalised recommendations