Number of co-authors:12
Number of publications with 3 favourite co-authors:Mark Zachry:3Alan Borning:1Lance Bennett:1
Jonathan T. Morgan's 3 most productive colleagues in number of publications:Alan Borning:32Mark Zachry:16Robert M. Mason:12
Not even the nascent state of the Web can excuse the amateurish lack of usability of today's eCommerce initiatives. The sites we evaluated demonstrated a fundamental failure to incorporate decades-old principles of software design. But as the novelty of doing business on the Web gives way to demands for basic quality, companies will have to get serious about user experience.
-- Sonderegger, Forrester Research, December 1999
Read the fascinating history of Wearable Computing, told by its father, Steve Mann
Read Steve's chapter !
Our Latest Books
Kumar and Herger 2013: Gamification at Work: Designing Engaging Business Software...
by Janaki Mythily Kumar and Mario Herger
Whitworth and Ahmad 2013: The Social Design of Technical Systems: Building technologies for communities...
by Brian Whitworth and Adnan Ahmad
Soegaard and Dam 2013: The Encyclopedia of Human-Computer Interaction, 2nd Ed....
by Mads Soegaard and Rikke Friis Dam
Jonathan T. Morgan
Publications by Jonathan T. Morgan (bibliography)
Kriplean, Travis, Morgan, Jonathan T., Freelon, Deen, Borning, Alan and Bennett, Lance (2011): ConsiderIt: improving structured public deliberation. In: Proceedings of ACM CHI 2011 Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems 2011. pp. 1831-1836.
We designed, built, and deployed ConsiderIt to support the Living Voters Guide, a website where any voter could participate in writing a voters' guide for the 2010 election in Washington. ConsiderIt is a new method of integrating the thoughts of many into a coherent form, while nudging people to consider tradeoffs of difficult decisions with an intuitive interface.
© All rights reserved Kriplean et al. and/or their publisher
Morgan, Jonathan T., Mason, Robert M. and Nahon, Karine (2011): Lifting the veil: the expression of values in online communities. In: Proceedings of the 2011 iConference 2011. pp. 8-15.
Wikipedia's stated mission is to provide a free encyclopedia that people all over the world can use and contribute to. However, while Wikipedia is successful at providing access to free, high quality information to users around the globe, the degree to which Wikipedia has succeeded in facilitating contribution on a global scale is less well known. The mechanisms used to determine why and how content is included have, for the most part, taken place "off-stage" and in ways that are less visible to the casual Wikipedia user. In this study, we explore the relationship between the ideals on which Wikipedia was founded and the policies and practices of the close-knit community that has developed around the shared practice of building the encyclopedia. Through a case study of a polarized talk page debate we show that the editorial community of the English language Wikipedia has a distinct cultural character, which can be uncovered through an examination of the way community members use the social and technical mechanisms of the website and through an analysis of the rhetorical appeals made by editors engaged in heated talk page debates. Our analysis reveals an inherent tension among the values held by the majority of Wikipedians, the values articulated in Wikipedia's mission statement, and the values of the global community of readers that Wikipedia was created to serve.
© All rights reserved Morgan et al. and/or ACM Press
Morgan, Jonathan T. and Kriz, Sarah (2010): Robot rescue!: an HRI engineering outreach activity. In: Proceedings of the 5th ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human Robot Interaction 2010. pp. 347-348.
This video is an example of an engineering outreach activity that we designed to illustrate some of the core issues in HRI research. High school students attending the University of Washington 2009 Summer Math Academy were given a disaster scenario and were asked think about how a robot could help a victim who was trapped by fallen rubble during an earthquake. Students were led through a series of thought questions that encouraged them to consider the type of information the robot would need to give to the victim, the victim's family, and the rescue team. They also considered how a victim might respond to a robot, and the behaviors the robot should display during the rescue. The students then created a script for the rescue scenario, writing not only their own lines, but the behavior and communication of the robot as well. All relevant consent forms were obtained from the participants prior to the outreach event.
© All rights reserved Morgan and Kriz and/or their publisher
Oxley, Meghan, Morgan, Jonathan T., Zachry, Mark and Hutchinson, Brian (2010): "What i know is...": establishing credibility on Wikipedia talk pages. In: Proceedings of the 2010 International Symposium on Wikis 2010. p. 26.
This poster presents a new theoretical framework and research method for studying the relationship between specific types of authority claims and the attempts of contributors to establish credibility in online, collaborative environments. We describe a content analysis method for coding authority claims based on linguistic and rhetorical cues in naturally occurring, text-based discourse. We present results from a preliminary analysis of a sample of Wikipedia talk page discussions focused on recent news events. This method provides a novel framework for capturing and understanding these persuasion-oriented behaviors, and shows potential as a tool for online communication research, including automated text analysis using trained natural language processing systems.
© All rights reserved Oxley et al. and/or their publisher
Morgan, Jonathan T. and Zachry, Mark (2010): Negotiating with angry mastodons: the wikipedia policy environment as genre ecology. In: GROUP10 International Conference on Supporting Group Work 2010. pp. 165-168.
Groups collaborating in online spaces on complex, extended projects develop behavioral conventions and agreed-upon practices to structure and regulate their interactions and work. Collaborators on Wikipedia have developed a multi-tiered policy environment to document a set of evolving principles, processes, and rules to facilitate productive group collaboration. Previous quantitative studies have noted this hierarchical structure, but have evaluated the policy environment as a singular entity rather than investigating potential differences between the three main regulatory genres that enable it. These studies also excluded essays, the least official regulatory genre, from their analyses. We perform a comparative content analysis of all three genres (policies, guidelines, and essays) and demonstrate that they focus on different areas of community regulation. Drawing on the theory of genre ecologies we discuss the possible role of unofficial genres such as essays in articulating and regulating work practices in online, organized collaborative work.
© All rights reserved Morgan and Zachry and/or their publisher
Divine, Doug, Morgan, Jonathan T., Ourada, Jamie and Zachry, Mark (2010): Designing Qbox: a tool for sorting things out in digital spaces. In: GROUP10 International Conference on Supporting Group Work 2010. pp. 311-312.
This poster introduces Qbox, a flexible tool developed by the Communicative Practices in Virtual Workspaces research group at the University of Washington to support traditional and innovative forms of analysis for web-based and digital material. Qbox integrates three functional areas of work associated with content analysis: consolidating and presenting source data, performing coding or classification work, and analyzing results. Developed using an iterative user-centered design approach to support ongoing research, this tool enhances research protocol by providing a flexible application to organize digital spaces, and demonstrates the power of productivity associated with agile, user-based development.
© All rights reserved Divine et al. and/or their publisher
Show list on your website
Join the design elite and advance:
Changes to this page (author)10 Nov 2012: Modified05 Jul 2011: Modified
16 Jan 2011: Modified
16 Jan 2011: Modified
03 Nov 2010: Modified
03 Nov 2010: Added
Page maintainer: The Editorial Team