Number of co-authors:7
Number of publications with 3 favourite co-authors:Michael D. McNeese:6Clifford E. Brown:5Maryalice Citera:4
Brian S. Zaff's 3 most productive colleagues in number of publications:Michael D. McNeese:21Clifford E. Brown:8Maryalice Citera:5
Computer programs emerge as the outcome of complex human processes of cognition, communication and negotiation, which serve to establish the meaningful embedding of the computer system in its intended use context.
-- Floyd, 1992, p. 24
Read the fascinating history of Wearable Computing, told by its father, Steve Mann
Read Steve's chapter !
The Social Design of Technical Systems: Building technologies for communities
by Brian Whitworth and Adnan Ahmad
The Encyclopedia of Human-Computer Interaction, 2nd Ed.
by Mads Soegaard and Rikke Friis Dam
Brian S. Zaff
Publications by Brian S. Zaff (bibliography)
Citera, Maryalice, McNeese, Michael D., Brown, Clifford E., Selvaraj, Jonathan A., Zaff, Brian S. and Whitaker, Randall D. (1995): Fitting Information Systems to Collaborating Design Teams. In JASIST - Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 46 (7) pp. 551-559.
Brown, Clifford E., Selvaraj, Jonathan A., Zaff, Brian S., McNeese, Michael D. and Whitaker, Randall D. (1994): An Integrative Bargaining Paradigm for Investigating Multidisciplinary Design Trade-Offs. In: Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society 38th Annual Meeting 1994. pp. 1028-1032.
In design teams, decision making entails negotiation among parties pursuing common goals with potentially divergent interests and objectives (Bucciarelli, 1988). In multidisciplinary design teams, these parties negotiate from perspectives further biased by their respective backgrounds, expertise, and roles. System design can be improved if we better understand how technical data are communicated and assimilated, how mutually advantageous tradeoffs are discovered, and how the managing of design tradeoffs can best be supported. As part of our larger research effort in Collaborative Design Technology, we are examining the processes by which integrative design tradeoffs are realized, in preparation for enhancing these processes through data visualization and communication tools facilitating mutual understanding and decision making. This initial report describes our work to date in creating and validating an experimental paradigm to serve as a testbed for subsequent studies of multidisciplinary design practice. This paper describes the paradigm and the initial attempts to demonstrate its ecological validity. This initial validation effort involved a comparison of novices and experts in the field of design and their performance on the design decision making task. We found that experts performed better than novices on the design task, which provided initial validation support for the experimental paradigm.
© All rights reserved Brown et al. and/or Human Factors Society
Zaff, Brian S., Hughes, Edward R., McNeese, Michael D., Brown, Clifford E. and Citera, Maryalice (1993): Diagnosing Macroergonomic Problems: A Case Study in the Use of Concept Mapping for TQM Initiatives. In: Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society 37th Annual Meeting 1993. pp. 873-876.
This paper presents the results from a case study involving the use of concept mapping in a Total Quality Management (TQM) program. Concept mapping is a knowledge acquisition technique that has proven successful in a variety of instances when it was necessary to elicit information directly from domain experts and communicate that information to other individuals needing the information. The concept mapping technique produces, during the course of an interview, a graphical representation that becomes a communications medium through which ideas can be easily shared in a group setting. In TQM programs it may be necessary to elicit detailed information from employees about the nature of their work domain and about the various problems they may be encountering. The success of TQM programs often depends on establishing open lines of communications through which employees can articulate their concerns and upon the ability of TQM team members to uncover hard-to-detect problems. Concept mapping proved successful in the TQM setting. The concept mapping technique facilitated the uncovering of insights that were not obvious to the TQM team during their initial brainstorming sessions or from the use of a survey. In addition it appears that the concept mapping technique has other significant TQM advantages over and above its utility as a knowledge elicitation technique. Concept mapping, not only facilitates user-centered knowledge acquisition, but also appears useful as a means of facilitating team-building.
© All rights reserved Zaff et al. and/or Human Factors Society
McNeese, Michael D., Zaff, Brian S., Brown, Clifford E., Citera, Maryalice and Selvaraj, Jonathan (1993): Understanding the Context of Multidisciplinary Design: Establishing Ecological Validity in the Study of Design Problem Solving. In: Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society 37th Annual Meeting 1993. pp. 1082-1086.
The need to understand the design process in all its complexity is motivated by an interest in the development of tools and technologies that would be capable of aiding collaborative design teams. This development effort depends upon an understanding of design activities as they occur within a real world context. Observations of design activities that are made without direct communication with the design team members may fail to capture many of the subtler aspects of the process -- aspects that are best understood when described by the design team members themselves. In order to supplement observational studies, this paper presents a case study in which a dialog with members of a variety of collaborative design teams was established in order to elicit information about the nature of collaborative design. A knowledge acquisition technique, concept mapping, was used to achieve an understanding of the role of human factors specialists within the collaborative design process specific to the Air Force's system acquisition program. Results highlight various findings about the nature of design problem solving such as the way different organizational settings influence human factors input in the design process/product. The paper discusses the usefulness of concept mapping to capture in-depth design knowledge and how this type of knowledge complements other approaches to understanding design.
© All rights reserved McNeese et al. and/or Human Factors Society
Citera, Maryalice, Selvaraj, Jonathan A., Brown, Clifford E., Zaff, Brian S. and McNeese, Michael D. (1993): Development of a Research Paradigm to Study Collaboration in Multidisciplinary Design Teams. In: Proceedings of the Fifth International Conference on Human-Computer Interaction - Poster Sessions: Abridged Proceedings 1993. p. 174.
McNeese, Michael D. and Zaff, Brian S. (1991): Knowledge as Design: A Methodology for Overcoming Knowledge Acquisition Bottlenecks in Intelligent Interface Design. In: Proceedings of the Human Factors Society 35th Annual Meeting 1991. pp. 1181-1185.
This paper documents the historical perspective of 'knowledge as design' as a natural human philosophy which necessarily resulted in user centered design praxis. A revival of this philosophy is called for in the presentation of the advanced knowledge and design acquisition methodology. The application of this methodology for overcoming bottleneck problems and alleviating brittleness in the Pilot's Associate is described and evaluated. The paper discusses three specific techniques designed to capture these perspectives: IDEF modeling, concept mapping, and design storyboarding. An integrative structure combining these techniques is proposed as an interactive way to let users, as well as other design team members, assimilate, progressively deepen, and combine knowledge for the purpose of developing intelligent systems and human-machine interface designs. Results indicate that pilots were able to successfully reveal their own comprehension of an air-to-ground mission and transform conceptual knowledge into actual designs for an intelligent pilot-vehicle interface.
© All rights reserved McNeese and Zaff and/or Human Factors Society
Show list on your website
Join the technology elite and advance:
Changes to this page (author)31 May 2009: Modified29 Jun 2007: Modified
26 Jun 2007: Modified
26 Jun 2007: Modified
26 Jun 2007: Modified
26 Jun 2007: Added
Page maintainer: The Editorial Team