SofterReadingGroup

From SE Wiki
Revision as of 15:36, 22 December 2010 by 128.100.4.130 (Talk)

(diff) ← Older revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
Jump to: navigation, search

Monday July 16th 1 - 3 pm BA7172


  • Dealing with "Map Shock": A Systematic Approach for Managing Complexity in Requirements Modelling

Moody, D.

Recommended by Sotirios


Monday June 25 1-3 7172

  • What Makes a Good Diagram? Improving the Cognitive Effectiveness of Diagrams in IS Development</a>

Moody, D.


Recommended by Sotirios

Monday June 11 1:00 to 3:00 BA7172

!! Program comprehension (NE) Most of the work here looks at how software developers model and make sense of source code and designs. Related to reverse engineering research.


Tuesday May 1 1:30 - 3:30 BA7321

  • Program comprehension (NE)

Most of the work here looks at how software developers model and make sense of source code and designs. Related to reverse engineering research.


Tuesday April 3rd 1:30 to 3:30 BA4290 !!Cognitive engineering (suggested by NE) This field is concerned with complex systems (planes, plants, military) and making them fit for human use - to reduce operator error, promote safety, etc.


Tuesday March 20th, 2 to 3:30 BA7172

---

Tuesday March 6th 1:30 to 3:30 BA4290

Trying to test qualities about mental and physical models before/after i* EvaluationTuesday February 20th


1:30 to 3:30 BA7172

Here is an excerpt from the abstract: Engineers talk of abstractions and models. I define both, consistently with the way that engineers, computer scientists, and formal logicians use the terms. I propose that both abstractions and models have what Searle calls an agentive function, namely that both models and abstractions are models/abstractions of something, for a purpose. It follows that both abstraction and modelling are most fruitfully thought of as ternary relations (or, when the purpose is forgotten, binary).


Tues Jan. 23rd

[MentalModelNotes]


Although it is focussed on mental models I think it sheds a lot of light on how and why we use concrete models (e.g. i* models). Tues. Dec. 12th 12 to 2 BA5256


  • Cognitive dimensions of notations

Proceedings of the fifth conference of the British Computer Society, Human-Computer Interaction Specialist Group on People and computers V, : 443--460, 1989.

http://www.cl.cam.ac.uk/users/afb21/CognitiveDimensions/papers/Green1989.pdf


Nov 14, 2006

He defines a theory of of how tools (including models) can be deemed useful to our thinking (including modeling) processes. The theory is based on distributed cognition.

[CognitiveSupportNotes]


Oct 20, 2006

This appeared in the following journal: HUMAN FACTORS, Vol. 46, No. 1, Spring 2004, pp. 50–80.

[TrustInAutomation]


Oct 6, 2006

  • Cognitive Bias or Judgmental Bias

(Jorge writes:) Although the classic text on these topics is the book Judgment under Uncertainty: Heuristics and Biases, by Kahneman and Tversky, I haven't been able to find a summary of it for us. They seem to have published the essentials in an article in Science, but it's old and U of T doesn't have access to it.

So, instead, I propose we read a paper on the economical irrationality of humans, also by Tversky and Kahneman. They show how our decisions do not make sense from a purely game theoretical perspective, and analyze which other factors seem relevant for humans when making decisions.

The paper is | Rational Choice and the Framing of Decisions, published in The Journal of Business. The link to software engineering might be very weak, although I could argue that these considerations are elemental for a proper conceptualization of goal analyses.


Sept 22, 2006

  • Sterman 91 a Skeptic's Guide to computer models

http://sysdyn.clexchange.org/sdep/Roadmaps/RM9/D-4101-1.pdf

Sterman's own work is on system dynamics with qualitative and quantitative modeling. This paper discusses various kinds of dynamics modeling - simulation, optimization, econometric. Relevant when we consider what i* model evaluation can/should do.

I think this paper may also raise questions about what's hard and and what's soft. --- Aug 18, 2006

  • Checkland's Soft Systems Methodology

Checkland was a pioneer in introducing a "softer" approach to IS development. The main reference is a book. Checkland, Peter (1981). Systems Thinking, Systems Practice. London, John Wiley & Sons.

This retrospective article seems to give a summary. http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/cgi-bin/fulltext/75502921/PDFSTART http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/cgi-bin/abstract/75502921/ABSTRACT?CRETRY=1&SRETRY=0 Soft systems methodology: a thirty year retrospective Peter Checkland. Systems Research and Behavioral Science Volume 17, Issue S1 , Pages S11 - S58 Supplement: Peter Checkland at 70: A Review of Soft Systems Thinking Copyright © 2000 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Reproduced from Soft Systems Methodology in Action, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd, Chichester, 1999.

see also http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soft_systems

--- Aug 6, 2006

  • Shum Hammond 94 IJHCS Argumentation-based design rationale: what use at what cost?

http://dx.doi.org/10.1006/ijhc.1994.1029 --- July 24, 2006

  • Scaife, Rogers - External cognition: how do graphical representations work?

http://dx.doi.org/10.1006/ijhc.1996.0048 --- July 10, 2006

  • David Kirsh, When is Information Explicitly Represented? Chapter 12 of "Information, Language and Cognition"

--- June 22, 2006

  • Yvonne Rogers, Distributed Cognition and Communication, Encyclopedia of Language and Linguistics (2nd ed.)