Joint Action Theory and Pair Analytics: In-vivo Studies of Cognition and Social Interaction in Collaborative Visual Analytics
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
s Joint Action Theory (JAT) has been groundbreaking for understanding the social and cognitive mechanisms that allow people to effectively coordinate joint actions in conversational, face-to-face settings.Using a method we call "Pair Analytics," we have extended the application of JAT to the study of analytical reasoning in computer-mediated, human-to-human interactions.Pair analytics (PA) sets a naturalistic scenario in which the social and cognitive role of human-human and human-computer interactions can be studied.In this paper, we support the claim that coupling JAT and PA is an effective research strategy to capture and study three socio-cognitive phenomena in collaborative visual analytics: (1) structuring and navigation of joint analysis; (2) management of joint attention; (3) and signaling of cognitively demanding tasks.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it