SCHOOL OF INFORMATION UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN 1 Addressing the Social-Technical Gap in Remote Instrumentation Erik C. Hofer School of Information University of Michigan

SCHOOL OF INFORMATION UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN 2 About Me n Member of Collaboratory for Research on Electronic Work (CREW) n Trained as a social scientist n Often the lone social scientist in the room n Work on a number of collaboratory projects –“Science of Collaboratories”, NSF IIS –

SCHOOL OF INFORMATION UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN 3 Overview for this talk n Introducing the social-technical gap n The gap in action in remote instrumentation n A few examples n Next steps

SCHOOL OF INFORMATION UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN 4 The Social-Technical Gap n Technology is rapidly progressing –We can move more bits, faster and over many types of media n What we do with all of these bits isn’t always that clear n How having so many bits at our fingertips is going to change the way we work isn’t so clear either n Enter the Social-Technical Gap

SCHOOL OF INFORMATION UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN 5 Wired VS reality More Time Performance Less hype raw performance of technology “real performance” “reality gap”

SCHOOL OF INFORMATION UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN 6 Remote changes instruments n Enable the remote control and observation of instruments does much more than shift the knobs and screens to a distant terminal n Many technical advancements –More data channels –Higher sampling rates –More immediate data feeds –Data streams that can be analyzed on the fly –Increased capacity to store data

SCHOOL OF INFORMATION UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN 7 Social change is happening too n These technical changes provide new “affordances” to users, allowing for corresponding changes in day-to-day work n Many changes in scientific practice are emerging –Difference between data collectors and analyzers –Synchronization of many instruments –Combination of simulation and observation –Shifting focus from instruments to datasets –And many more

SCHOOL OF INFORMATION UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN 8 Scope of social change n The behavioral aspects of remote instrumentation system design and deployment will affect all levels of scientific practice n Some different levels of effect: –Adoption –Use –Scientific practice –Future systems

SCHOOL OF INFORMATION UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN 9 A few examples n Social factors in system design and adoption n Example: Instrument control room –In order to facilitate remote operation and expert consultation, control rooms for a particular instrument were outfitted with video cameras. n What happened?

SCHOOL OF INFORMATION UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN 10 Video in the control room n Three attempts at deploying this video system –Lens scratched, painted and covered with gum –Camera smashed and hidden –Camera never found n So, what happened? –Ninja hypothesis No one saw or heard the vandals Must have been outsiders who snuck through security undetected… –Violated organization norms of privacy and reciprocity

SCHOOL OF INFORMATION UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN 11 Bugscope n Scanning electron microscope at the Beckman Institute –APIs for remote control, observation n Work with K-12 education in outreach activity n “Opportunity” to engage in real-time interaction with instrument makes it interesting to K-12 audience

SCHOOL OF INFORMATION UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN 12 Bugscope

SCHOOL OF INFORMATION UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN 13 UARC / SPARC n Several generations of an aeronomy research collaboratory –UARC: , NSF IRI –SPARC: , NSF ATM n Enabled remote observation of a number of instruments in geographically “interesting” locations

SCHOOL OF INFORMATION UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN 14 Sondrestrom Observatory Sondrestrom, Greenland

SCHOOL OF INFORMATION UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN 15 SPARC

SCHOOL OF INFORMATION UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN 16 Effects of UARC / SPARC n Much easier access to instrument n Broader educational use –Feb, 1995 student campaign n Simultaneous views or many instruments n Combination of simulation and observational data

SCHOOL OF INFORMATION UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN 17 What to do? n We must pay attention to the social ergonomics of new systems and modifications to existing systems n A few factors that matter –Privacy –Reciprocity –Ease of use –Agreed “rules of the road” –Culture –Adoption –Training

SCHOOL OF INFORMATION UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN 18 Next steps n Use this group as a forum for analyzing best practices from many fields n Use successes and failures to map the design space for remote instrumentation systems n Create standard policies and recommendations to shape organizational incentive structures n Evangelize the social! –Social factors in remote instrumentation systems are as important as the technical challenges

SCHOOL OF INFORMATION UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN 19 Contact Info and Links n Erik Hofer, n n n bugscope.beckman.uiuc.edu n intel.si.umich.edu/sparc