Demonstration venue · read-only. Every page can be browsed; the buttons that would change it are switched off. Create an account to run TaxoReview on your own data. A simulation from public publication records: the people listed were not invited and did not agree to review.
? Tutorial for this page

Julian E. Orr

dblp:117/7470 · DBLP profile ↗
← Back
1ranked-venue papers
1as first author
0since 2021 · last 1986
—ORCID · none

Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several

Human-computer interaction and ubiquitous computing · 1 · 1 first-author

Expertise — from the expertise taxonomy: the topics of the expert's papers under the CCF categories. A weight counts papers with recency: 1 for a paper about the topic, 0.3 when the topic is its context, halved every five years.

Human-computer interaction and pervasive computing
1 paper
Collaborative and social computing · 100%
Software engineering, system software, and programming languages
1 paper
Empirical software engineering · 100%

Topics — the 2 heaviest of 2, each with the papers that count most for it

TopicWeightPapersLastEvidence papers
Collaborative and social computing › creative work › creative practice
storytelling
0.011986
Narratives at work: story telling as cooperative diagnostic activity · CSCW 1986
Empirical software engineering › practitioner studies
workplace studies
0.011986
Narratives at work: story telling as cooperative diagnostic activity · CSCW 1986

Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics

ethnography · 0.0
YearPublicationVenuePosition
1986 Narratives at work: story telling as cooperative diagnostic activity
abstract
The diagnostic process for copiers involves narration of the process, including a description of the state of the machine. This follows from the fact that copiers are elaborate assemblages of relatively simple mechanisms, and the problem in diagnosis is not so much the testing of components as keeping track of the tests and making sense of their results. The anecdotal re-telling of this narrative to one's associates constitutes the mechanism for incorporating the diagnostic experience into the community expertise. These anecdotes are remembered and used or referred to during the diagnosis of other difficult problems or when seeking help. Individual expertise is in part the ability to interpret the anecdotes, to abstract the information about the machine from the context of the story. The participation of the community in remembering and using these anecdotes gives the community the flexibility to adapt to the unforeseen problems which are necessarily part of the service function.
Julian E. Orr
CSCW1