MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W193018022 · doi:10.11575/prism/966

Domestic awareness and the role of family calendars

2007· article· en· W193018022 on OpenAlex
Carman Neustaedter

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenuePRISM (University of Calgary) · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicInformation Systems Theories and Implementation
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsInterpersonal communicationTypologyFamily memberComputer scienceInternet privacyKnowledge managementWorld Wide WebPsychologySocial psychologySociologyMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Everyday family life involves a myriad of mundane activities that need to be planned, scheduled, and coordinated. Paper calendars are one tool used by families to help stay organized; yet, the downside is they are only available in one location and can be hard to synchronize if multiple calendars are used. Digital calendars offer promise to overcome these challenges by making family calendaring information ubiquitously accessible. However, we do not yet know how to best design digital family calendars in order to meet the coordination needs of families. I address this problem through three research stages. First, I outline a model of interpersonal awareness that is derived from contextual studies of 29 individuals. This model reveals how and why people maintain an awareness of individuals from three social groupings: home inhabitants, intimate socials, and extended socials. It shows that interpersonal awareness is fundamentally different than workplace awareness; thus, interpersonal awareness groupware should be designed to meet a range of domestic, not workplace, needs. One of these needs is groupware for family calendaring. Second, I present an empirically-based understanding of family calendaring routines that is derived from contextual interviews with 44 families. I outline how a typology of calendars is used by three different family types--- Monocentric, Pericentric, and Polycentric---where the level of family member involvement in the calendaring routine varies. I also describe the content and annotations found on family calendars. This theory is then recast as guidelines for the design of digital family calendars that are ubiquitously available to help families overcome coordination challenges. Third, I outline the participatory design and evaluation of the LINC digital family calendar. LINC includes three systems: an awareness appliance for the home; LINC Web which allows family members to check the calendar from a web browser; and, LINC Mobile which supports calendar browsing on a mobile phone while out and about. Field trials of LINC with four families show that LINC is a viable alternative to paper calendars as it allows families to maintain the benefits of their existing calendar routine while extending it in ways not afforded by paper calendars.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.570
Threshold uncertainty score0.991

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.011
GPT teacher head0.261
Teacher spread0.250 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it