Number of co-authors:13
Number of publications with 3 favourite co-authors:Michael D. McNeese:6Brian S. Zaff:5Maryalice Citera:4
Clifford E. Brown's 3 most productive colleagues in number of publications:Michael D. McNeese:21Sarah J. Swierenga:7Denise L. Wilson:7
For a list of all the ways technology has failed to improve the quality of life, please press three.
-- Alice Kahn
Read the fascinating history of Wearable Computing, told by its father, Steve Mann
Read Steve's chapter !
Clifford E. Brown
Publications by Clifford E. Brown (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.
Boff, Kenneth R., Monk, Donald L., Swierenga, Sarah J., Brown, Clifford E. and Cody, William J. (1991): Computer-Aided Human Factors for Systems Designers. In: Proceedings of the Human Factors Society 35th Annual Meeting 1991. pp. 332-336.
Over the past decade, a multi-phased project supported by agencies of the Department of Defense, FAA, and NATO has been underway to understand and remediate problems in the transitioning of ergonomic research to system design applications. Efforts to enhance the usability of ergonomic data in system design have resulted in the present R&D project, which is concerned with developing a multi-media ergonomics database on CD-ROM. The Computer Aided Systems Human Engineering (CASHE) system, Version 1.0, will contain the Boff and Lincoln (1988) Engineering Data Compendium, MIL-STD-1472D and the Perception&Performance Prototyper. The Perception&Performance Prototyper will allow the user to experience and manipulate the technical data found in the Compendium and MIL-STD-1472D. The CASHE tool will also include specialized data retrieval, scaling, and analysis capabilities as well as state-of-the-art in information retrieval, browsing, and navigation.
© All rights reserved Boff et al. and/or Human Factors Society
McBride, Dorothy J. and Brown, Clifford E. (1989): Team Performance in a Dynamic Resource Allocation Task: The Importance of Heuristics. In: Proceedings of the Human Factors Society 33rd Annual Meeting 1989. pp. 831-835.
The utility of group decision heuristics was examined in the context of a dynamic resource allocation task which incorporates both certain and uncertain events. Visual coding schemes for presenting the events varied among teams, only half the teams received experimenter developed heuristics, and both moderate and fast information presentation rates were used. Performance scores were significantly higher for teams with heuristics. In addition, teams performed better under moderate time pressure and with practice, and teams without heuristics displayed inconsistencies in handling uncertain events whereas teams with heuristics behaved as predicted by utility theory. No performance differences were found for variations in visual coding schemes.
© All rights reserved McBride and Brown and/or Human Factors Society
Wilson, Denise L., McNeese, Michael D. and Brown, Clifford E. (1987): Team Performance of a Dynamic Resource Allocation Task: Comparison of Shared versus Isolated Work Setting. In: Proceedings of the Human Factors Society 31st Annual Meeting 1987. pp. 1345-1349.
The utility of shared versus isolated operator/display setting was examined in the context of a complex, dynamic, team decisionmaking task. Both alphanumeric and graphic display formats were utilized as well as moderate and fast information presentation rates. Performance scores were significantly higher and subjective workload ratings significantly lower for the graphic display and moderate information rate conditions. No differences were found for shared versus isolated operator-display setting except in the combined "worst case" condition of alphanumeric format and fast information rates, where a slight advantage was found for the shared operator/display setting.
© All rights reserved Wilson et al. and/or Human Factors Society
Show this list on your homepage
Join the technology elite and advance:
Changes to this page (author)15 Feb 2010: Modified31 May 2009: Added
29 Jun 2007: Added
26 Jun 2007: Added
26 Jun 2007: Added
26 Jun 2007: Added
26 Jun 2007: Added
26 Jun 2007: Added
25 Jun 2007: Added
Page maintainer: The Editorial Team